This post contains a pre-release extract for a new book by Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg in which he singles out New Zealand as a country whose current left-wing Government has committed it to a "zero carbon" economy that is unaffordable and will have no measurably material effect on climate behaviour by the end of the current century: "Given the expected temperature increase by around 2100, this means that New Zealand going net-zero by 2050 will postpone the warning that we expected to see on January 1, 2100, by about three weeks to January 23, 2100."
Distinguished U.S. analyst Dr David Wojick posts at CFact: "Few people appreciate this amazing fact, that CO2 in the air is the global food supply. Our meat, fruit and veggies, also our candy and ice cream, milk and wine, are built almost entirely from carbon dioxide and water. Everything we eat and drink.There is also a bit of nitrogen, to make protein, plus a bunch of trace minerals and vitamins, but you and I are basically composed of processed H2O and CO2."
In this lengthy Word.docx, which may take some seconds to download into your Downloads folder, experienced New Zealand investigator John Rofe recounts how the U.N. management and its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has misled the world about unnatural global warming (now called "climate change" in the absence of the alleged warming), and plans to refer to our country's Serious Fraud Office our National Institute for Water & Atmosphere (NIWA) and two top Government Ministers.
Former climate activist Michael Shellenberger has condemned alarmists for “terrorising school children” with false claims that the world is about to end... Adolescents these days have a lot to worry about, anxiety and depression are rising among everyone really, certainly adolescents, and I thought it was not right to be terrorising school children and giving them false information.” Shellenberger - who has been invited to be an expert reviewer to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - maintains that climate change is occurring but says it is not a “catastrophic threat”.
Self-styled environmentalist Michael Shellenberger has publicly apologised for his earlier part in creating a climate scare: "On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem."
H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D., a senior fellow on environmental policy at The Heartland Institute, posts at Epoch Times:. "In short, the oft-repeated assertions that weather is getting more extreme, is patently false. Drought, flooding, hurricane, and tornado numbers are well within their normal historic range of severity and frequency. Looking at the data, there is absolutely no basis for alarm."
Note: You may need to enter your email address for free entry to Epoch Tines website to read full article - it's simple.
Professor Ross McKitrick explains why IPCC's climate modelling is grissly misleading anbd inaccurate when based on its RCP 8.5 emissions scenario: "Thus for at least 30 years, when the IPCC and others have issued emission scenario ranges, the bottom end has always been the most realistic path and the rest has been exaggerated, yet the upper end gets all the media and academic attention. RCP8.5 takes this distortion to new heights. The purpose of global climate policy is to get us from the dangerous upper end of the forecast range down to the safe bottom end. But what users of climate projections need to understand is that we are already there. In fact, we never left it. We don’t need to kill the global economy to get onto an emissions path we’ve always been on. If we want to avoid the RCP8.5 future scenario all we have to do is stop feeding it into climate models, because that’s the only place it exists."
In a new paper, atmospheric physicist Dr. Richard Lindzen summarizes the “implausible” claims today’s proponents of dangerous anthropogenic global warming espouse. Dr. Lindzen retired several years ago, and yet his immense contribution to the atmospheric sciences lives on. His research is still cited about 600 times per year.
U.S. atmospherics physicist, Dr Ed Berry writes: "Get over it. You are not causing global warming. Those who tell you otherwise are lying to you. Here is new, powerful evidence that the climate alarmists are wrong. They flunk science. They have caused the greatest scam in human history. The United Nations IPCC is the “scientific” base for all climate alarmism."
Dr Mototaka Nakamura writes: “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public.” The climate models are useful tools for academic studies, he admits. However: “The models just become useless pieces of junk or worse (as they can produce gravely misleading output) when they are used for climate forecasting.”
Emeritus Professor Michael J Kelly, of Cambridge University has a warning: "if one concludes that the 2050 Net-Zero Emissions Economy cannot be achieved on scientific, materials, engineering, planning and financial grounds, it would be appropriate to reset the target to one that can be achieved, even at a stretch. With a changing climate, there may come a day when we need to act, just as we needed a Thames Barrier to prevent London flooding. It will be no excuse then that all the money was invested on projects to mitigate climate change, when the very need to adapt will be proof that the mitigation actions have failed."
Ralph B Alexander posts at the UK Global Warming Policy Foundation: "This report discusses the lack of scientific evidence for the popular but mistaken belief that global warming causes weather extremes – a notion hyped by the mainstream media and believers in the narrative of human-caused climate change. If there is any trend at all in extreme weather, it’s downward rather than upward. Our most extreme weather, be it heat wave, drought, flood, hurricane or tornado, occurred many years ago, long before the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere began to climb at its present rate."
Coalition energy spokesman, Bryan Leyland, has been writing to the newly-established New Zealand Climate Change Commission asking it to provide convincing evidence of dangerous man-made global warming. The Commission's replies that it relies on consensus of scientific institutions has been rejected by Mr Leyland who calls for the Commission to be disbanded.
For copies in sequential order of Mr Leyland's correspondence with the Climate Change Commission:
Australian geologist Peter Purcell produces evidence that many Pacific Islands, rather than sinking as claimed by climate alarmists and some money-hungry island leaders, are actually increasing in size due to a combination of the intrinsic nature of atolls and Pacific-area tectonic plate movements.
Dr Roger Higgs (DPhil Oxford, geology, 1982-86) writes: "The United Nations IPCC says ongoing warming is due to man's CO2 emissions, hence 'Anthropogenic Global Warming' (AGW). The 3 pillars on which they base this claim are unscientific and quickly disproved."
Britain’s plans to decarbonise the economy have not been properly thought through, and there is a dangerous lack of systems and project engineering input. That’s according to Michael Kelly, emeritus professor of technology in the Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge, who says that replacing fossil fuels with electricity from renewables is impractical on the timescale of 2050.“It’s clear that there has been little or no systems engineering input into the plans. How can we possibly proceed further along the renewables path when we lack any technology to store electricity at scale? How can we hope to electrify transport when we would need to consume the whole global annual supply of several important minerals to do so, just for the UK?” And Professor Kelly warns that the costs of decarbonising will be ruinous of our current standards of living.
U.S. physicist, Dr Ed Berry at his website edberry.com writes: "The fact that IPCC’s human carbon cycle is significantly different from the true human carbon cycle – that corresponds to IPCC’s natural carbon cycle – proves IPCC’s human carbon cycle is invalid. IPCC treats human and natural carbon differently, which is unphysical."
The MUST of all must-reads on climate change: This Powerpoint history by Greek Professor Demetris Koutsoyiannis recalls that climate change was adopted as a means of world government by a small group of eugenicists who wanted to limit Earth's population, HIghlights: World salvation from climate threats through global governance is the garment dressing the monster of totalitarian world control. We do not need saviours, who claim that they will save the planet, the humankind or the human race. History teaches that what we really need is to save ourselves (and our societies) from these anti-humanist saviours. Also, we need to protect freedom, democracy and education, which are currently under (unprecedented?) global attack. It took World War 2 to get rid of eugenics and human species salvation; will the COVID 19 crisis suffice to get rid of climate salvation?
The Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) is an EU-based organization promoting climate realism in the face of climate alarmism. CLINTEL authored “There is No Climate Emergency,” prepared by 700 scientists and professionals, When this CLINTEL document was attacked by the Poynter Institute on the basis of its membership, not the content of the document, Poynter was condemned in an open letter by CLINTEL president Dr Guus Berkhout who gave a welcome lesson in how such debates should be conducted.
Scientists have long known that the ocean plays an essential role in capturing carbon from the atmosphere, but a new study from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) shows that the efficiency of the ocean’s “biological carbon pump” has been drastically underestimated, with implications for future climate assessments. In a paper published April 6 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, WHOI geochemist Ken Buesseler and colleagues demonstrated that the depth of the sunlit area where photosynthesis occurs varies significantly throughout the ocean. This matters because the phytoplankton’s ability to take up carbon depends on amount of sunlight that’s able to penetrate the ocean’s upper layer.