Professor Michael Kelly
The Global Warming Policy Foundation announces the 2019 Annual GWPF Lecture will be delivered by Professor Michael Kelly, FRS, FREng, Emeritus Prince Philip Professor of Engineering, University of Cambridge. Continue Reading →
[Anon1:] A major problem is that Harry Clark, who is the only scientist on the ICCC, has a conflict of interest. If we submitted Jock & Tom’s paper (Greenhouse gases – a more realistic view (2018)), for instance, then Harry Clark would pour cold water on it. If he accepted the conclusions then his job and research funding for the greenhouse gas research outfit would cease. If he were replaced with Reisinger or Frame the same thing would happen. Continue Reading →
We see mistakes in the Herald every day, but this morning there’s an inglorious language blunder from a sports reporter:
“If the browbeaten All Blacks were expecting an easier time of it in the World Cup bronze match against Wales on Friday, they have another thing coming.
Undated, but perhaps mid to late 19th century.
Beef and Lamb New Zealand today issued an Update to Farmers about Climate Change and Water, including their Announcement on Agricultural Emissions. Continue Reading →
Essay 6: Big emissions reduction bang for every buck
Reducing emissions is expensive. Every dollar spent on climate change mitigation is a dollar unavailable for health or housing or poverty; waste is unacceptable. New Zealand’s new Commission must recognise that where emissions occur is irrelevant and stick with the “global peaking” aim.
Essay 5: Cuckoo Shaw lays 1.5°C egg in cosy Paris nest
The Paris treaty ratified by New Zealand says: “We’ll keep the temperature increase to 2°C, never mind about trying for 1.5°C.” But Shaw says: “Yeah, nah. Never mind about 2°C, we’ll shoot for 1.5°C, the lower the better, right? Lead the world. How hard can it be?”
Not a conversation this time, just a snippet — an important one to me, because it’s further confirmation of my layman opinion that man-made emissions cannot significantly heat the ocean, and important for all climate sceptics, since it adds to arguments refuting the climate scare. Note that this scientist’s view applies to greenhouse gases in general, whereas the DAGW scare relies only on mankind’s emissions, which are a tiny fraction of atmospheric carbon dioxide — less than 10% of all CO2, or about 0.004% of the atmosphere. Continue Reading →
Roger Pielke Jr. delivers the harsh, mathematical truth. Even if every person in the world thought abandoning fossil fuels made sense, even if every last government was committed to such a plan, the sheer size of the task would remain. He says the scale is mind-boggling.
Politicians and business leaders announced new steps to fight climate change. But much remains to be done.
Source: The Economist
THOSE CONCERNED about global warming change had a clear message for the leaders attending the United Nations Climate Action Summit on September 23rd. Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old activist, led protests in New York imploring politicians to act now to limit rising temperatures, and warned leaders at the summit: “The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us I say we will never forgive you.” Continue Reading →
A list of facts to remove children’s terror of global warming from Andrew Bolt, of the Herald Sun, Melbourne. He says it won’t kill you and we must fight the hysteria that follows Greta Thunberg’s breakdown at the United Nations. Easy to print out — distribute wildly widely.
UPDATED 16 Nov — added a link to Andrew Bolt’s article and corrected the link to Australian rainfall since 1900, adding a mini preview too.
A significant new collaboration will present rational views of climate change theory and observation on a global stage.
From: Professor Guus Berkhout
[email protected]
23 September 2019
Sr. António Guterres,
Secretary-General,
United Nations,
United Nations Headquarters,
New York, NY 10017,
United States of America.
Ms. Patricia Espinosa Cantellano,
Executive Secretary,
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
UNFCCC Secretariat,
UN Campus,
Platz der Vereinten Nationen 1,
53113 Bonn, Germany.
Your Excellencies,
There is no climate emergency
A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.
Continue Reading →
Press briefing
AS THE LATEST UN climate summit begins in New York, a new, high-level global network of 500 prominent climate scientists and professionals has submitted a declaration that there is no “climate emergency”.
Continue Reading →
Nuclear power has moved on since Fukushima — now Gen III and IV, small, self-regulating, cannot melt down, put them virtually anywhere. Available in various sizes that last from 3 to 20 years or more. If it fails, truck in another one. Cheaper than coal, more efficient and safer than ever. Come on, Greenies, why resist it? Afraid we might survive your climate crisis?
Essay 4: Climate scare could be gone by 2030
The Hon Barry Brill’s fourth essay (pdf, 302 KB) of these eleven on the Zero Carbon Bill examines the Government’s economic modelling, which tells us increasing New Zealand’s net emissions target from 50% to 100% by 2050 will cost us $200–$300 billion over 30 or more years of ‘blood, toil, tears and sweat.’ Continue Reading →
Essay 3: Climate-wise, we are the champions!
The third (pdf, 240 KB) of these eleven essays by the Hon Barry Brill on the Zero Carbon Bill has a look at the vanity factor, asking:
From Copenhagen in 2009 to Paris in 2015 we did our best to hog the limelight by taking a lead. Now the Green Party strives to legislate for carbon neutrality by 2050 to gain the prize. But that’s all about ego—what are the facts? Continue Reading →
Essay 2: 2050, costs vs benefits
The second (pdf, 267 KB) of these eleven essays by the Hon Barry Brill on the Zero Carbon Bill has a look at what it will cost us and what we will get in return. Barry asks the fundamental question:
The sacrifices in eliminating carbon emissions by 2050 will be far more painful than some undetectable heat, and far off, as it’s 30 years away. Admittedly this is a long time for government planning—usually tuned to about five years at a time—but it’s a savagely short time to create total disruption in our commercial, industrial, agricultural and other spheres—and then attempt to smooth it over. Continue Reading →
To the Editor
Climate Conversation Group
11 September 2019
Bushfires are normal events in this season in tropical and sub-tropical latitudes of the southern hemisphere — in Australia, Africa and South America. Even Captain Cook noted many fires in Eastern Australia in 1770, long before the era of “global warming” hysteria. Continue Reading →
Petteri Taalas, Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
London, 6 September: The General-Secretary of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) says that the alarmist narrative on climate change has gone off the rails and criticised the news media for provoking unjustified anxiety. Continue Reading →
Source: Science Goes Up In Rain Forest Smoke – The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
You could destroy all of the world’s forests and it would hardly affect our oxygen supply. In fact you could destroy every living thing on Earth and still not dent it because our atmosphere of 20.9% oxygen is the gift of geologic time, slow to build up and we have enough to last millions of years. Yet this idea of the world’s lungs and of atmospheric oxygen needing to be refreshed and replenished, ideas unsupported by science, is everywhere.
Look how much we had to go through for science to wrench our minds free of what is “obviously true” and seek proof. Is climate science, or at least the public side of it, immune from normal scientific standards? And where are the high profile, “public” scientists setting the record straight, highlighting that the Amazon rain forests are not the lungs of the world?
– Dr David Whitehouse, GWPF Science Editor
BY THE WAY: To open the comment window, click the post title.
Essay 1: The Zero Carbon Bill
Barry Brill has given us these eleven essays on the Zero Carbon Bill. Do sample these enjoyable pieces for yourself, with their crisp writing and clear logic. It’s illuminating to absorb Barry’s analysis of the origins of the Bill, its aims, strategies, substantial flaws, and his oh-so-pragmatic strategy to align the Bill with our international obligations without exposing our lower classes to the egregious fanaticism of the coalition’s Green climate dogma.
Barry’s first essay (pdf, 185 KB) opens with the startling news that the Bill is
Our dim-witted commander.
In 1994, the authors of Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies coined the phrase “big hairy audacious goal” (BHAG, pronounced BEE-hag) to describe an organisation’s vision statement.
Barry Brill, Chairman of the NZ Climate Science Coalition and Bay of Islands lawyer, uses the term to describe the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill (ZCB).
Wellington – a lovely climate
Really? Are you serious? Well, prove it!! Tell us the evidence! Of course you’d first have to ask for some. Oh, and would you care to describe the effect of your silly declaration on the global temperature in 2030, 2050 and 2100?
The Wellington regional council has declared a climate emergency and thinks it can take action – including on its fleet of diesel buses. The region, as well as the world, has about 10 years to cut its emissions in half to change the course of climate change, the Greater Wellington Regional Council was told on Wednesday. Councillor Sue Kedgley said there had been some comments around the table about whether or not there was actually “an emergency”.
“I can’t understand how we can watch the news and not conclude that we’re in an emergency.”
A few weeks after saying “every action makes a difference” on climate change, Prince Harry and Meghan Markel emitted six times more emissions in two jet trips than the average Briton does in a year.
Source: The Real Reason They Behave Hypocritically On Climate Change Is Because They Want To
British Royal couple Prince Harry and Princess Meghan Markle triggered widespread outrage recently after lecturing the world about climate change while flying around the world in private jets. Continue Reading →
A Stuff article on Saturday by Amber-Leigh Woolf, Climate change accelerating but people can help change a world crisis, scientist says, quotes Prof James Renwick, who mentions a couple of hitherto unknown and surprising aspects of global warming.
The Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences professor said people were right to worry about the world’s future because the rate of climate change was accelerating. Climate change was affecting an ecosystem which had been in place for tens of thousands of decades, and could be destroyed within 40 years.
India’s Coal Minister, Pralhad Joshi, said (5 August, 2019): Continue Reading →
Herald headline, 4 August – Climate scientist: It’s cold now, but NZ region just saw its warmest July.
Prof Jim Salinger
Professor Jim Salinger, who helped create the benchmark seven-station national temperature series, the 7SS (or SSS, if you prefer), now runs a competing series using 22 hand-picked land weather stations (let’s call it the 22-station Salinger series, or 22SS). He claims July is an all-time record 1.79 °C above average, while the previous record of 1.74 °C above average in July, 1998, is demoted to second. Continue Reading →
The knowledgeable conversations in the NZ Climate Science Coalition are often gripping and inspire me to more research. I’d like them to find a rich appreciation among a broader audience, so let’s see how they appeal to you, the reader. This first one is from about four days ago. Some of our members prefer to remain anonymous. — RT
[Dr Jock Allison:] Please have a look at https://issuu.com/farmersweeklynz/docs/fw_22-07_issuu page 19. This is the first of a series of four articles that Harry intends to write for the NZ Farmer’s Weekly. Harry Clark is the CEO of the NZ Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre, and I sent him a copy of the Allison & Sheahen paper (attached), with my assessment that anthropogenic methane was responsible for less than 1% of the world’s warming. His response was as follows. Continue Reading →
These emissions figures are well over ten years old. You’d think by now, for such a topical matter, the Royal Society might have found the 2017 data. Oh, and the MfE claiming agriculture produces nearly half our emissions is a scandal driven only by ideology. They should start pretending they are non-partisan: reduce methane’s atmospheric lifetime to a more realistic five or six years, remove its demented GWP of 28 times carbon dioxide’s and finally acknowledge that the country is a net carbon sink.1
refer The NZ Farmers Weekly – 22 July, 2019
The Government say farmers should pay for emissions from 2025—just six years away—so long as we devise a means of calculating those emissions.
To get their taxes altered, to reflect changes on the farm, farmers will have to provide evidence like invoices and receipts to prove their animal emissions have gone down.
But they’re having to prove they reduce what cannot be proved causes harm.
Because, which is extremely odd, the government has not produced evidence to show the emissions alter the weather, or that there’s a “climate emergency”. That can’t be fair.
The government will say (because they’ve told us before), “we listen to the IPCC.” But to that we say, “We did exactly that too, we examined what they said, and they have no evidence.”
The situation couldn’t be more pig-ignorant if you threw chicken bones on the ground and claimed to know the future. Continue Reading →
Insights from the
NZ Climate Science Coalition
See this:
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/deadline-approaching-climate-change-commission-nominations
James Shaw is making the gross presumption that his loony Zero Carbon Bill will pass, by calling for nominations to a Climate Change Commission BEFORE the proposed legislation establishing that commission has even started its Second Reading.
Continue Reading →
Takes a while to melt this baby.
We’re not afraid of climate change. Since pre-humans started making tools over 2 million years ago we’ve been dealing with climate change and it has never destroyed us. Continue Reading →
Nobody really knows how much it would cost us to attempt to meet James Shaw’s Zero Carbon prescription, as it would take 30 years and there is much about it that is yet unknown.
But the Zero Carbon Bill’s own accompanying Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) admits that it’s impossible to identify any quantifiable benefits at all, and following Barry Brill’s outstanding examination of the Bill Continue Reading →
Insights from the
NZ Climate Science Coalition
Articles in Business Insider since late June make outlandish claims about the European heat wave. Outlandish because they imply this was man-made global warming destroying the environment. It was nothing of the kind, just local weather systems producing temporary extreme temperatures. Continue Reading →
But I’m back
It’s about two months since my last post, which I think is the longest hiatus since postings began in January 2005. What happened?
Even the good Professor Renwick tells a story of emergency.
The outlandish declaration of a climate emergency is short on substance — there’s no evidence for it.
It’s no surprise that the sponsors of this charade try to intimidate us with abusive language. They’re hoping we won’t question their proclamation. Continue Reading →
A little bird tells me of something rotten in the state of NZ Engineering. Continue Reading →
The final wording of the summary for policymakers is being finalised in Paris by a gathering of experts and government representatives before the launch on Monday, but the overall message is already clear… [bold added by DL]
In other words, as happens at the IPCC, scientists are recruited to write a report. Afterward, they draft a summary known as the Summary for Policymakers (SPM). Then politicians and bureaucrats representing national governments attend a plenary meeting where the summary gets examined line-by-line and rewritten. Continue Reading →
What would it mean?
First, visualise the vast edifice global warming has grown to be. It dominates influential spheres: education, religion, commerce, industry, academia, law, government and its organs, international treaties and totalitarian aspirations. A great industry turning over billions annually has grown up to provide its machinery. Continue Reading →
Professor of Physics Peter Ridd
James Cook University sacked Professor Ridd because of misconduct. Professor Ridd asked the Federal Circuit Court whether his actions or the decision of the university to sack him were unlawful. The Court’s decision, delivered on 16 April, was that the 17 findings made by the University, the two speech directions, the five confidentiality directions, the no satire direction, the censure and the final censure given by the University and the termination of employment of Professor Ridd by the University were all unlawful. He had done nothing wrong.
What follows down to the horizontal line are extracts from the judge’s decision. Continue Reading →
Dr Ed Berry has written a paper entitled Human CO2 has little effect on atmospheric CO2. He concludes:
Human CO2 does not increase atmospheric CO2 enough to cause climate change.
We are ill-served by our news organs with overseas news, and what we get on Brexit is decidedly pro-Remain, so I’m pleased to present this commentary from Melanie Phillips. She quotes a Whitehall whistle-blower who discredits the chilling Remainer predictions describing a no-deal Brexit as a “cliff edge.” My interest? Advancing the cause of free speech and seeing the welcome return of “the inventor of political liberty” to that liberty. As well, if a real Brexit is achieved, the UK will be more able to abandon the economic wrecking ball that is EU climate policy. Germany just joined the eastern states on economic grounds in refusing to commit to “climate neutrality” by 2050; what revolt might be next? The human energies to be released by Brexit hint at decades of prosperity for millions—we among them.
As this Brexit crisis has degenerated into a nightmare, with Remainer MPs making their no-holds-barred attempt to block Brexit while the prime minister tries to force through her dreadful and dishonest snatch-Remain-out-of-the-jaws-of-Brexit deal, I have been very moved by the messages readers have been steadily sending me demonstrating that amongst the public, Britain’s indomitable spirit has not been quashed.
This would have been better published promptly (sorry!), but even tardy is better than never. — RT
This extraordinary recent headline is still visible online, published by Stuff over the name of one Charlie Mitchell, journalist:
Charlie Mitchell
By asking for evidence of climate change, a council is neglecting its duty
We, the young, are deeply concerned about our future. Humanity is currently causing the sixth mass extinction of species and the global climate system is at the brink of a catastrophic crisis. Its devastating impacts are already felt by millions of people around the globe. Yet we are far from reaching the goals of the Paris agreement.
We, the young, are deeply concerned about our future. Humanity is currently causing the sixth mass extinction of species and the global climate system is at the brink of a catastrophic crisis. Its devastating impacts are already felt by millions of people around the globe. Yet we are far from reaching the goals of the Paris agreement.
Professor Andreas Neef, a disaster recovery expert at the University of Auckland, very handsome and seemingly a qualified authority on climate science, said extraordinary things in the Herald on Friday. All of it was aimed at raising alarm among New Zealanders for the climate calamities soon to strike us. But nothing he says is supported by real-world data. Continue Reading →
Here’s a piece, including graph, regarding Jim Salinger’s opinions on global warming that I thought the NZ Herald might like for an op-ed three weeks ago. They didn’t. It’s now slightly improved and I’ve added the earliest NZ temperature records. I like the fact that the error margins swallow these Lilliputian record margins. — Richard Treadgold
A week ago, Dr Jim Salinger, jumping the gun a little, predicted 2018 would prove to be NZ’s hottest year. The Herald indulged his forecast (inadvertently awarding him the title professor) with the heading 2018 NZ’s hottest year on record. Unfortunately, when they published NIWA’s official data a few days later, Jim’s claim turned out to be wrong, with 2018 declared the second-hottest year, following 2016. Continue Reading →
Let us understand!
Mr Andrew Robb
Chairman
West Coast Regional Council30 January 2019
Dear Andrew,
The Climate Conversation Group admires your council’s decision—which has gained widespread attention—not to support the Zero Carbon Bill until the science of the underlying theory of man-made global warming has been clearly explained and properly proven.
Continue Reading →
Greenpeace ocean plastic — fake whale, fake filled with plastic for propaganda photos. See kids cheering camera.
Apparently the government plans fines of $100,000 for companies that hand out a free plastic bag. What tyranny is this, what cruel despotism fills our masters? These bullies bring no evidence to justify harsh punishment. Just because other countries fine such convenience doesn’t make it right, and first they must substantiate the harm we’re supposed to be causing. Continue Reading →
Democracy rules.
Let’s follow the story, until at least 29 March. Continue Reading →
For the next wee while, stay away from the USA and the UK. Key sections of both countries have lost their minds.
Hills? Clouds? Ocean? — from MetService website
A curious climate scandal was raised this week by one of our long-time favourite readers, biologist Dr Maggy Wassilieff (here is her comment).
Maggy reports on an article in the Sunday Star-Times by Paul Gorman, who describes the extraordinary duplication of national weather forecasting by both the MetService and the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), both Crown Research Institutes (CRI).
As an aside, I must say how pleased I am to see a Stuff journalist inquiring into matters of climate—truly exciting, like spotting a unicorn.
Continue Reading →