CLIMATE FRAUD EXPOSED AGAIN

 Why do climate scientists manipulate data to completely change what it shows?  It is so blatant that it would be laughable, were it not for the very serious implications of the fraudulent result. Here is the short video explaining what has been done:

NOAA Climate Fraud Index | Real Climate Science 

CLIMATE UNCERTAINTY AND RISK

Here is a thoughtful presentation from Judith Curry

 Climate Uncertainty & Risk: the presentation | Watts Up With That?

"The climate “crisis” isn’t what it used to be. Circa 2013 with publication of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, the extreme emissions scenario RCP8.5 was regarded as the business-as-usual emissions scenario, with expected warming of 4 to 5 oC by 2100. Now there is growing acceptance that RCP8.5 is implausible, and RCP4.5 is arguably the current business-as-usual emissions scenario according to recent reports issued by the COP 26 and 27. Only a few years ago, an emissions trajectory that followed RCP4.5 with 2 to 3 oC warming was regarded as climate policy success. As limiting warming to 2 oC seems to be in reach, the goal posts were moved in 2018 to reduce the warming target to 1.5 oC.

Climate catastrophe rhetoric now seems linked to extreme weather events. For nearly all of these events, it is difficult to identify any role for human-caused climate change in increasing either their intensity or frequency."

MORE PAIN FOR BRITISH HOUSEHOLD ENERGY USERS

 The UK government is today announcing that it will force British households to pay an additional charge on their energy bills to reduce the costs of Net Zero for some 300 energy intensive industrial users.

Net Zero Watch today condemned this so-called “Households Payment Mechanism” as deeply unfair to consumers, but utterly inadequate as help to industry.

It is reported that the so-called ‘British Industry Supercharger’ will cost each household about £3 to £5 per year, suggesting that the scheme will move about £80m to £130m of green energy costs from industry to households.

This is simultaneously deeply unwelcome for domestic consumers, who are struggling as it is with high energy bills, but trivially weak for businesses.

The measure is not expected to come into force until 2025, when the Office for Budget Responsibility expects levies to support fundamentally uneconomic renewable energy (such as wind and solar energy) to amount to £9 billion per year (and over £10 billion including the Feed-in Tariff for smaller generators).

This huge annual green surcharge is being paid by all energy consumers, with severely negative economic consequences.

The government’s support package for industry is trivial by comparison and seems designed simply to get a few good headlines in response to the bad news of more closures and job cuts in the steel industry.


Dr Benny Peiser, Director of Net Zero Watch said:

"As long as the UK continues to prioritise Net Zero over the national interest, energy security and economic competitiveness, Britain will lose the last traces of its industrial base, its prosperity and its global status."


Dr John Constable, Net Zero Watch’s energy editor, said:

"The laughably named ‘British Industry Supercharger’ is nasty in principle but pathetically weak in practice. Instead of playing PR games, government needs to tackle the root cause of our energy problems, namely the wind and solar and biomass subsidies that are costing all consumers many billions per year. The green levies must be cut to the bone. We simply can’t afford them."

CLIMATE SIGNALS FROM ANCIENT ICE AND WOOD

You would think that there was no doubt that we are living in unprecedented times with all the shouting about a "climate emergency", but if you take a cool look at the past it seems that this is all hype.

 Climate signals from ancient ice and wood - Net Zero Watch

8 YEAR CLIMATE PAUSE - HOW LONG WILL IT CONTINUE?

 Or should the headline read "how long will it be allowed to continue?" The following article explains what is going on:

Is NOAA trying to warm the current 8+ year pause? | Watts Up With That?

It is odd to see such clear tampering of the record, even though it is small. It gives the impression that something is not right.

A SOLAR PANEL REVOLUTION IS UNDERWAY

 Advances in solar panel technology are amazing and will result in dramatic improvements in their efficiency as this video shows:

Solar 3.0: This New Technology Could Change Everything - YouTube

As this kind of improved technology happens we could end up with cheaper energy, but we still need a dramatic improvement in storage.   

RATIONING - COULD THAT BE THE FUTURE?

The idea of rationing as a means of "fighting climate change" is being touted around and Paul Homewood has put a piece on his blog here:

 Climate Scientists Want Rationing To Fight Climate Change | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

Personally I think this is something that will cause a lot of outrage among the public. It will be hard to convince people that they should endure rationing when there is no actual shortage of the items. They will also be aggrieved to see that these measures are not adopted in other nations. So any government that brought in rationing would immediately become very unpopular. In a democracy this would normally lead to another political party adopting a policy to lift the rationing. This is why I doubt any government would dare to introduce such a measure. 

COMMON SENSE ON THE "ENERGY TRANSITION"

I strongly recommend you to watch this excellent speaker go through his extensive graphs and charts to show the impossibility of a transition from fossil fuels to wind turbines and solar panels. Mark Mills presentation is done in a very balanced manner, making it all the more powerful. Here is the link:

 Mark Mills: The energy transition delusion: inescapable mineral realities - YouTube

I think his conclusion is likely to be correct. See if you agree.

LEARN TO LIVE WITH THE CLIMATE AND ADAPT TO COPE WITH EXTREMES

 That, in summary is what Ross Clark recommends in his Not Zero book. After all, humans have found ways to live in places which often exceed 40 degrees C. in summer and others which often get below minus 40 degrees C. in winter. From tropical rain forests to deserts, from 1400 feet below sea level on the shores of the Dead Sea to 18,000 feet above sea level, and places where the wind regularly exceeds 100mph.  Why would we not be able to cope with a one or two degrees increase in temperature and a slight increase in rainfall?

The trouble with net zero is that we will be poorer and less able to put in place the measures to deal with climate extremes which are already happening as part of the natural climate variability. Poverty is the biggest problem, not climate.   

PUBLIC OPINION - MORE POLLING RESULTS

 I am interested in finding out what the public really think about the issue of climate change, given the mass propaganda on it from the main TV news stations. There is some information in the new book by Ross Clark - "Not Zero".

In January 2021, a poll by the UN Development Programme involving 1.2 million people across 50 countries found that 64% agreed with the assertion that there is a "climate emergency". In Britain and Italy the figure was even higher at 81%.  In another poll in October 2021 by YouGov and the Cambridge Centre for Public Opinion Research, 70% agreed with the statement "I would be prepared to change my behaviour to help limit climate change".  But when it came down to specific changes they were rather less enthusiastic. Only 42% supported the ban on petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and 19% supported a meat tax. 

The whole problem with polling is that the results can be skewed by the way the questions are asked. Look at my post on the ONS poll (here:climate science: PUBLIC VIEWS ON CLIMATE CHANGE) which showed that only  around 30% claimed they were "very worried" about climate change, leaving the other 70% as not very worried. And yet the UN poll showed that 81% agreed that there was a "climate emergency". How can anyone not be very worried, and at the same time accept there is an emergency? 

The reality is that the public's views on climate are, for the most part, very shallow. Having seen all the doom laden news items, they don't feel that they can say they are not worried, while at the same time they can see in their every day experience that there is nothing unusual happening to their own climate. Therefore they are willing to go along with the narrative of a climate emergency but not if it is going to affect them adversely.  

NOTTINGHAM CITY CLAIM THEY WILL BE "CARBON NEUTRAL" IN 2028

 Nottingham City Council reckons the city will become "carbon neutral" by 2028. See here:

What is CN28? - Nottingham City Council

There is a lot of virtue-signaling going on, but what exactly do they mean? Will all their homes be free of gas heating and cooking? (not likely) or will all their cars become electric - with all electricity coming from green sources? How about food? Will it all be locally sourced with no meat products?

Their is no mention of any of this in their smooth soundbites. They could have picked any year, so why choose 2028?  Is anyone fooled by this stuff? Mind you, the government's aim for 2050 is just as far-fetched.

Why does no Councillor in their council ask some awkward questions?  I guess they have all been brain-washed.

PREVENTING BLACKOUTS COST THE GRID OVER £4 BILLION IN 2022

Here is the true situation regarding the cost of adding more wind and solar to the grid: 

National Grid spends £4bn to prevent blackouts after surge in wind and solar | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

That works out at £150 for every household in the UK. How can anyone say that this could give us cheap energy? It is now perfectly clear that this is a complete fiction. As time passes and electricity becomes more and more expensive everyone will realise the truth. Having to get to net zero by 2050 is what is driving this mad rush. What will history make of all this? Sadly none of us will be here to see the final judgement

MARTIN DURKIN SPEAKS OUT ON STATE CLIMATE CONTROL

 You may remember the polemical film The Great Global Warming Swindle. It was produced by Martin Durkin who speaks out in this interview where he talks about the price he has paid for daring to take on the climate change movement. 

#22 - Martin Durkin on updating The Great Global Warming Swindle, and fighting the “new class” - YouTube

Martin's views are very interesting. He observes that the hardline, militant climate sceptics such as Extinction Rebellion are mainly composed of middle class people who are actually intent on destroying capitalism and replacing it with a highly controlled society in which people are subject to rationing.  

The original video of The Great Global Warming Swindle is still available here:

The Great Global Warming Swindle - Full Documentary HD - YouTube

MOON DUST COULD SAVE US FROM GLOBAL WARMING!

You can read all about this crazy idea here:

 Save Earth by blowing holes in the moon? Moon dust as a sunscreen for Earth « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

There are a few questions which need answering such as, how much will it cost and who is going to pay? Will everyone benefit or will some parts of the world be worse off? Personally I would not want us to embark on such a scheme unless it was an emergency. So far it is not.

NET ZERO - A DISASTER FOR THE UK

Ross Clark has written a new book in which he dissects the policy of achieving net zero CO2 emissions by 2050. Below is a link to an interview with Ross (sound only) in which he explains the inconsistency and the foolishness of committing to the arbitrary target while other nations carry on emitting. This is an important book and interview.  

The folly of Net Zero - spiked (spiked-online.com)

PUBLIC VIEWS ON CLIMATE CHANGE

 Further to my previous post (2nd February) I decided to follow it up by looking at some more detailed survey results from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) here in the UK. Remember the question was "How worried or unworried are you about the impacts of climate change?"

Results by age group:

                          all ages   16 to 29        30 to 49       50 to 69      70+

very worried               28%           33%            30%           23%        25%

somewhat worried      46              34               46              51           52

neither worried or not 17              22               13              18           16

somewhat unworried    3                1                 4                2             3

not at all worried           6               10                7                5             4 

First of all it shows that the "very worried" group is at most 33% down to 23%. This clearly shows that a large majority of the population at all ages are not very worried.

 "Somewhat worried" is the answer from the majority, which is not surprising given the vast amount of doom-laden climate items regularly on the news. Even the vast majority of the youngest age group who have grown up with this have not selected "very worried". 

This must be a great concern to the government who will have to impose some very unpopular restrictions and cost increases on us if they are to reach net zero by 2050. As time goes by and the climate continues to have much the same variety of weather as always, it will get harder and harder to sell the idea of a climate "emergency". This will be particularly so if the CO2 levels in the atmosphere continue to rise despite the restrictions imposed here. 

Here is a link to the survey data: Worries about climate change, Great Britain - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

CO2 REDUCTION TAKES MONEY AWAY FROM VITAL BASIC NECESSITIES

The current obsession with eliminating CO2 emissions is taking the focus away from putting more into clean water and energy for lighting and cooking. Read it here:

Analysis: How the green elites are impoverishing the world | Climate Depot

 

SEA LEVELS ARE STABLE - REJOICE!

 Here is the article which covers the good news which, strangely, has not been broadcast on the main TV news channels:

Sea Level Is Stable Around The World… The Good News The Media Don’t Want Us To Hear | Climate Depot

REALITY CHECK ON MET OFFICE PROJECTIONS

 England was projected to be between 3 and 4C warmer on average by the 2080s, in comparison with 1961-90.

The actual trend so far is much less dramatic:

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/data/meantemp_seasonal_totals.txt

The current 30-year average is only 0.72C higher than 1961-90; but more significantly, it is just 0.40C higher than 1931-60.

Given this knowledge it is not credible to postulate that average temperatures will rise by another 3C or more in the next 60 years, particularly since temperatures in the hottest of summers do not appear to be increasing.

Even if every summer in the 2080s was as hot as last year, the long term average would still only be 2C higher than 1961-90.

Yet UKCP09 is still used as the basis for climate projections, and similar nonsense numbers are coming out of the most recent set of projections in UKCP18.

Read the whole article here: UKCP Summer Temperature Projections Are Not Supported By The Data | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

INTERVIEW WITH STEVEN KOONIN

Following my previous post of Jordan Peterson's interview with Richard Lindzen, I also recommend very strongly this interview of Dr Steven Koonin again with Jordan Peterson. Peterson is a great interviewer as he obviously has a good knowledge of the subject and interjects with some very insightful questions. Koonin, like Lindzen, is a remarkably well-qualified man who really is worth listening to. The public should see these interviews to open their eyes to what is going on in the climate change field. 

Unsettled: Climate and Science | Dr. Steven Koonin | EP 323 - YouTube

IN DEPTH INTERVIEW JORDAN PETERSON WITH RICHARD LINDZEN

At almost two hours this is a serious in-depth discussion, but I an highlighting it because some of you will want to explore the thinking of such an eminent scientist as professor Lindzen. The first 30 minutes is devoted to an introduction to Richard in which his rapid promotion through to becoming a full professor was aired, with his holding various important positions. It was very impressive and underlines why he is someone who should be listened to. After the intro the interview moves on to his views on the various aspects of climate science. 

Climate Science: What Does it Say? | Dr. Richard Lindzen | EP 320 - YouTube

10 DEGREES OF WARMING IN A DECADE!

 We are told that our recent 1 degree Celsius of warming in 150 years is "unprecedented", but just see what happened 11,500 years ago at the end of the period known as the Younger Dryas:

NOAA National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service: Drought and the Ancient Maya Civilization

In the face of the Earth's climate changes we should admit that we cannot prevent changes, but we must be ready to adapt to them.

CLIMATE DATA FIDDLING EXPOSED YET AGAIN

 It is so easy to fool people by using false data because there is nothing to hand to check it against. Luckily Tony Heller has done his research and found the facts from old newspaper articles, as he demonstrates in this recent short video:

Imaginary Climate History | Real Climate Science

The question that needs to be asked is, why is the past climate temperature data being constantly altered? The only logical answer is that it is being done to make it conform to fit with an agenda. The pressure to do this may seem hard to imagine, but in fact it is simply that, once a majority of those in positions of influence come to accept that their career depends on conforming to a certain position, then they will  automatically go along with whatever is necessary to further that agenda. 

History shows that this has happened many times. For example, the power of religion, also the power of the ideological state. These are the most obvious examples, but they illustrate the willingness of most people in society to conform. Fortunately we live in more enlightened times today, hence Tony Heller is able to go against the agenda. But he, and any others that do so, risk becoming "outcasts" and, if they wanted career promotion for example, it would not be a sensible course of action.    

CLIMATE INFORMATION BEING CENSORED

We think we live in a free country and yet there are organisations attempting to shut down information and opinions that they disagree with, using the excuse that they are somehow protecting us from receiving "false" information.  Read about it here: 

The Ministry of Climate Truth | Watts Up With That?

The problem with this is who gives them the authority to do it and why should they decide which things are "true"? Clearly there are things on the internet that are incorrect, but it should be up to us to decide who to believe.

UPDATE:

More on this here:

What looks, acts and smells like a Global News Cartel and just got hit by an Antitrust lawsuit… « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

MAKING CLIMATE DATA UP IS THE NEW SCIENCE

I think reliance on computer modelling is getting out of hand. As it becomes more and more used to replace actual measurements, trust in science is only going to fall.

 Who Needs Actual Data? Not The Met Office! | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

ENERGY OUTLOOK - GOOD FOR FOSSIL FUELS

This article looks at what BP has to say: 

BP Energy Outlook 2023 | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

The Net Zero scenario completely unrealistic. Nobody seriously believes the whole world will have to all intents and purposes eliminated CO2 emissions by 2050. The whole idea that China, India and the rest of the developing world is going to give up the extra energy their economies need to grow is absurd. Under the only rational projection, which the report calls New Momentum, fossil fuels will still be supplying 55% of the world’s energy in 2050, with renewables well down the list at 35%.

DO THE PUBLIC REALLY BELIEVE THERE IS A CLIMATE EMERGENCY?

How worried are the public about the impacts of climate change? That is a very interesting question which has recently been asked of the residents of the New Forest, here on the south coast of England, as part of a residents survey. Here is a link to the survey:

Residents survey - New Forest District Council

If you click on the link you will see that the headline about climate change was:

"75% feel worried about the impact of climate change" When you looked at the actual responses, this is what people gave (this is not in the link, but was given to me on asking for it) I have also obtained some national (UK) survey data from ONS to put alongside the New Forest (NF) data :

                                                    NF                   UK

Very Worried:                             29.5%               22% 

Somewhat Worried:                   45.2%               42%

Neither Worried nor Unworried: 11%                  20%

Somewhat Unworried:                 5%                    3%

Not at all Worried:                        9%                    9% 

Don’t know:                                  1%                    2%

The totals do not add up to 100% due to rounding errors.  You can see that by adding those who are "very worried" to those "somewhat worried" you do get to almost 75% (64% for the UK)  BUT if you were to take the "somewhat worried" away and instead add them to the rest, this gives a total of 71.2% who are not "very worried" (78% for UK). Anyone who really believed there was a climate emergency would answer "very worried" - so clearly over 70% do not believe it.

It is not surprising, given the constant barrage of doom-laden stories that appear on our TV news bulletins, that many people would say they were "worried". What was interesting was that over 45% (42% UK) did not say they were "very worried", but instead chose a lesser degree of "somewhat worried". I would suggest that this softer category is quite significant. 

If you click to download the report you will find some more detail. In item 5.10 it gives a summary of people's response to questions about what they have done, or would be willing to do to "address climate change", or to "benefit the environment". 

The responses show that although people said they had used less energy at home, the primary reason they did that was not for the benefit of the environment, but simply to save money due to the big rise in energy costs. Another response was they had driven less, but again the majority had done this to save money, not the climate.

This backs up my hypothesis that the 45% who responded they were "somewhat worried" simply do not believe there is a climate emergency. What would have been interesting would have been to ask them how much they would personally be willing to pay in increased taxes and costs in order to get the country to achieve net zero emissions of CO2.

UPDATE:

Here is a link to the Office for National Statistics website which holds the survey data:

Worries about climate change, Great Britain - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

IF ONLY WE HAD A SENSIBLE GOVERNMENT LIKE NORWAY

Political leaders here in the UK seem to be bereft of all common sense. Despite the country having taxes at an all-time high, along with government debt, they still cling to their plan to reach net zero and drive out all energy intensive industries (or have to massively subsidise them). Meanwhile, across the North Sea, Norway takes a very sensible approach:

 Soaring gas price helped Norway triple its hydrocarbons tax revenue — MercoPress

And if you think that Labour would be any more sensible, well sadly no.

Labour will end North Sea oil investment | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

FUSION - HOW CLOSE IS IT?

Surely no sensible government can be expecting wind turbines and solar panels to produce the vast amount of reliable cheap electricity that the world needs when they get to net zero. No, I think they have set 2050 as the target date to make sure it is out of their time in office and what they are relying on (or should I say hoping for) is for something to turn up. I know, it is a crazy way to go on, but can you think of a more plausible idea? One of the possible projects they are betting on is nuclear fusion. So how are things going. Here is a good video to get us up to date:

Fusion power: how close are we? | FT Film - YouTube

FULLY COMMITTED TO COAL

The headline refers to India, but we know it could just as well apply to China. Here's the link:

 India’s Uncompromising Commitment to Coal | Watts Up With That?

"Coal is still the largest contributor to global power generation. Leaders of Asian countries know this and are not inclined to risk their objective of economic liberty with over reliance on highly volatile and expensive “renewable” technology."

EAT INSECTS TO SAVE THE PLANET

This new directive has been issued by the EU, but I'm sure the UK will soon follow suit.  

Memo to Minions: You will be allowed to eat crickets to save the climate says EU « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

No doubt our diet will be changed, whether we like it or not, unless we look very closely at the ingredient labels. This has as much to do with increasing profits as reducing CO2 emissions. You have been warned!

" The European Commission declares new insect products safe for consumption. So from Tuesday, powdered house crickets and the small mealworm will also be allowed in food."

"Cricket powder will now be permitted in a number of food products, such as multigrain bread, crackers, cereal bars, biscuits, beer-like beverages, chocolates, sauces, whey powder, soups, and other items “intended for the general population,” according to the new regulation." 

ARE WHALES BEING SLAUGHTERED DUE TO WIND FARM DEVELOPMENT

 Many people think that wind farms are the key to stopping the use of fossil fuels, but how do we feel about the collateral damage to wild life. Should we risk destroying endangered wildlife in a vain attempt to change the climate? Here is the link:

Evidence says offshore wind development is killing lots of whales - CFACT

HOW IS OIL EXPLORATION DOING IN THE REST OF THE WORLD?

 You might think that oil is about to dry up across the globe. With all the talk of net zero, surely no one is still exploring for new oil wells? What about the imminent move away from fossil fuels and stranded assets? If you believe this is the future read this report:

Global Oil & Gas Discoveries Up, As Drilling Continues Apace | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

You see, the rest of the world knows that we still rely heavily on oil and will continue to do so for decades to come. Surely our politicians know it too, even though they cannot bring themselves to actually do any new drilling or fracking themselves. They prefer to virtue-signal and then import it, hoping that no one notices. 

BLACKOUTS A STEP NEARER

UK electricity supplies near to collapse amid pleas for help. How long can this go on? If predictions of a cold February come true it does not look good.  

National Grid 'made emergency requests to Europe for help to avert blackouts across the south-east' | Daily Mail Online

CLIMATE DEBATE LACKS DEMOCRACY

 There is a new website which has some thought provoking articles on it. This one:

Can climate policy be democratic? - Climate Debate

highlights the lack of any opportunity for the public to hear any opposing views on any aspect of the current drive to net zero. It also looks at the lack of any realistic opposition party to vote against the onslaught of the policy. As the results of the current policy continue to reduce ordinary people's quality of life, this can only lead to increased dissatisfaction. With no democratic way of expressing this, it is quite likely to lead to frustration boiling over. 

UPDATE:

Meet The Organisation Behind The Media’s Climate Hysteria | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

  

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, GOVERNANCE FACES A BACKLASH

 Environmental, Social, Governance* (ESG) - it doesn't trip off the tongue, but ESG has been gathering pace and influence among the Davos Elite and so it matters. Read further about it here:

Backlash: BlackRock CEO says attacks on ESG investing are getting ugly and personal « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

Business (or private) reputation is very important and so any threat to vilify a company or individual is very powerful. Once a set of actions becomes "must do" or "must not do" in the eyes of the woke media (and those who hold sway over them) then any organisation (or individual) needs a lot of courage to stand out against it.

*ESG sounds very important and high-minded, but in fact it means whatever the self-appointed high priests of woke want it to mean. 

BRILLIANT SPEECH AT THE OXFORD UNION

Konstantin Kisin speaking.to the woke about climate change at an Oxford University debate. This was flawless delivery with a compelling message.

 "Your Feelings Are More Important Than The Truth" - YouTube

THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM IS HERE TO SAVE US!

 But who is going to save us from them? Jo Nova has captured a few highlights from the gathering of this bizarre cult. Here is the link:

It’s a cult: The WEF are the “select few” touched as saviors of the world to master the future « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

You can only imagine what the pressure must be like to have such enormous responsibility on their shoulders.

COAL PLANTS ON STANDBY AS UK ICY WEATHER CONTINUES

How many time will the government ignore the warnings that net zero is a disaster waiting to happen? 

National Grid puts coal plants on standby to supply electricity - BBC News

THE TRUTH ABOUT CLIMATE HYSTERIA

Saturday's Daily Mail carried a three page article by Ross Clark which explained in the most reasonable language just what has been happening to the media when reporting on global warming issues. While not everyone reads the Mail, it still has a very large readership. There is more to come on Sunday. The articles come from a new book that Ross is just publishing. Here is the link to the article:

 ROSS CLARK challenges the hysteria that surrounds climate change debates and argues they risk harm | Daily Mail Online

Here are some quotes which illustrate the massive exaggeration in media coverage:

"On July 19 last year, Britain experienced its highest-ever recorded temperature: 40.3c (104.5f) at Coningsby, Lincolnshire. This was the fourth time Britain’s maximum temperature record had been broken since 1990 and is consistent with a warming climate.

Yet did that justify the reporting which framed it as an ‘apocalypse’ with predictions of 10,000 excess deaths from that summer’s heatwave? In the event, excess deaths came to less than a third of that. Moreover, the middle of 2022 witnessed a large unexplained number of excess deaths beginning in March, long before the heatwave."

"People already live and work quite happily in climates far hotter than Britain will experience even in the most dramatic scenarios of climate change. They manage to do this thanks to properly designed buildings, insulated from heat as well as cold, aided by proper ventilation and air-conditioning."

"There seem to be very simple rules behind the narrative being spun to the public. First, that climate change offers nothing positive, only harm. Second, that the only way to tackle that harm is to end climate change. The idea of adapting to it is considered sacrilege."

UPDATE:

Here is the follow up article in the Mail on Sunday:

ROSS CLARK says the Government's fantasy of net zero will leave us all...Poorer, colder and hungrier | Daily Mail Online

FORCE NEEDED TO BRING ABOUT NET ZERO

The video linked below explains that it will be necessary to force humanity to give up our current way of life to reach net zero. This is not the message that Western governments are currently putting out, and I doubt they will be that explicit. Their approach is to scare the people and hope to get them to change by means of an overwhelming propaganda campaign. It seems doubtful that this will be sufficient for a large proportion of people, many of whom will be unwilling, or unable, to pay to change their heating system or their car. It is at this point that we will see if force will be used and how much. The video highlights the suggestion of world government, but that looks a long way off, considering there is no consensus and never likely to be. Here is the link:

Climate Solutions - YouTube

 

SENSATIONAL CLAIMS VERSUS REALITY

Here is a good article which puts the outrageous claims made by climate alarmists in there place.  

A Critical Examination of the Six Pillars of Climate Change Despair | Watts Up With That?

My one criticism of it is that the author accepts the worst case projections, but he does so just to make a very good point, which is that even that is not nearly as scary as is made out. So we should relax and instead prepare for the worst extreme weather that we will undoubtedly get occasionally. 

STRANDED ASSETS - COULD BATTERY EV's JOIN THEM?

We keep being told that fossil fuel companies will be left with billions of dollars worth of stranded assets. But that could only happen if the whole world goes over to renewable energy, which does not look likely in China, India and Russia for a start. On the other hand supposing there is not a mass transfer to battery electric vehicles (BEVs)? Read more here:

 Stranded Assets - Donn Dears LLC (ddears.com)

WARMEST YEARS - HARD TO SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

The graph below compares the ten warmest years on record for global surface measurements. Here is a link: Annual 2022 Global Climate Report | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) (noaa.gov) The year 2022 was the sixth warmest since global records began in 1880 at 0.86°C (1.55°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F). What credence should we put on such data? 

Where were the recording stations in the polar regions, bulk of Eurasia, Africa, South America, and the oceans in 1880? How does infrared radiation in a warming atmosphere penetrate the oceans beyond 1 millimeter? 

It is hard to believe that there is much value in a claim that these figures are sufficiently accurate to be taken seriously. 

The ten warmest years on record

1.5C LIMIT COULD BE BREACHED IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS

The headline to this post might cause alarm to those who fear any rise in temperature of our lower atmosphere, but as you will see when you read the link provided, this unexpected  warming is predicted to be caused by a natural event, a volcanic eruption. It is only a prediction and our atmosphere is so complex that it might be completely wrong, just like the predictions of climate change. Here is the link: 

Study: The Tongan Eruption Might Cause a Breach of the 1.5C Global Warming Limit - Watts Up With That? 

The actual temperature change of 1.5C is so small that it is not possible for humans to feel the difference. Why this figure was chosen as a limit is also shrouded in mystery. It was seemingly plucked out of thin air. The fact that it could be breached by completely natural events is also worth noting.

One day we will realise that it is simply impossible to control the world's temperature or the climate. Of course many of us already do! In any case who wants to see the temperature drop by 1.5C and send us back to the end of the Little Ice Age?

CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE DEMYSTIFIED

There is so much one-sided propaganda put out by the media that many people find it hard to believe that there could be any doubt about the so-called climate emergency. So I thought it might be useful to give readers a link to something which reminds us of the many areas of doubt and uncertainty which are real. 

 A DIY Guide To Demystifying “Greenhouse Gas” Claims…The Science That Cuts Corners (notrickszone.com)

Here are some of the main points:

"Even without a scientific background, most people have at least good common sense. And that’s all it takes to get a grasp of how vigorously and chaotically enormous energy fluxes slosh up and down, back and forth between earth’s surface and the skies."

Below are some key points

At the top of the atmosphere, every square meter oriented towards the sun thus receives a fairly constant power influx of 1361 to 1362 W/m2. Whereas the main greenhouse gases contribute a very small amount each: 

          Carbon dioxide                           + 2.05    W/m2
          Methane                                       + 0.49    W/m2
          Nitrous oxide                              + 0.17    W/m2 
          Tropospheric ozone                   + 0.4      W/m2  

The complex reality of transfers and transformations of energy on our planet involving soils, waters, gases, clouds, aerosols, heat storage, conduction and convection, chemical reactions and phase transformations, as well as a host of additional factors are simply swept under the carpet, attributing all their combined effects solely to the odious “greenhouse gases”.

One of the favourite tricks of climate prophets of doom is to suggest that all major factors influencing our climate are more or less constant, with the sole exception of “greenhouse gases”. 

Another diversion has been to declare that water vapor is simply reinforcing the leading role of CO2. 

Well worth reading it all at the link above.

AUTOMOBILE MARKET FACING TROUBLE OVER EV PUSH

 Someone pointed out to me this interesting video. It talks about the massive interference by government in the automobile market in order to push battery electric vehicles. It is looking like this will seriously undermine the market. The man who does the talking, Harry, claims to believe in the climate emergency, even though he admits that the public are not ready to switch to expensive, less reliable EVs. I wonder why?

Here is the link to the video:

EV sales jumped in December to 33% of total new car sales. Here's why I think there's trouble ahead - YouTube  

SEA LEVEL RISE SCARE MUST BE TAKEN WITH A BIG DOSE OF SCEPTICISM

The linked article gives an insight into the accuracy of the state of the art satellite sea-level measurements. You will see that they are not as accurate as you might think as you read through to the end. Here is the link: 

Sentinel-6: New International Sea Level Satellite - Watts Up With That?

The very last points are set out below and need to be emphasized. 

5.  The ONLY sea level, or its rise or fall, of any importance to any locality or its governmental bodies is Local Relative Sea Level.  This sea level rise (or fall) caused by rising absolute sea level rise combined with vertical land movement (in most instances, downward) determines the magnitude of any risk or threat from sea level rise for that location.

6.  Many localities which have valuable infrastructure built on land only a few inches or feet above existing mean sea level for their location are already at risk of flooding by spring tides and storm surge and need to initiate changes in building codes and begin mitigation immediately.  The sea will continue to rise, ever so slowly.

So far there is no evidence of any change in the long term gradual rise in sea level here in the UK which is set at around 7 or 8 inches per century (16 to 19 cms) 

I have covered this subject before and new readers can read it here:

climate science: WHAT DO WE REALLY KNOW ABOUT SEA LEVEL RISE?

Another good article covering world sea level rise can be seen here:

Sea level is stable around the world - CFACT

ALABAMA IS COOLING!

"The warming effect on Alabama of the extra GHGs is a problem as the temperatures of the recent decades (which should be responding to the warming influence of extra GHSs) have actually been cooler than earlier decades when this influence was essentially absent. A lesson here is that for small areas of the size of a state or two, the long-term natural variations are typically greater than that exerted by extra GHG's.

So much for "global warming" - no wonder it has been changed to "climate change" ! Joking aside, the real point here is that the world has so many different climates affected by so many variables that many of them will be changing in totally different ways at the same time for a whole range of reasons. CO2 changes is just one small variable among many.

CLIMATE CHANGE COULD ALL BE NATURAL

John Christy on extreme weather and the link to  human CO2 increases: 

"We have observations for about 135 years in Alabama. Over this period, we can calculate the extreme values for every type of statistic desired, hottest day, hottest 3-days, hottest week, hottest fortnight, hottest month, etc. There are dozens and dozens of extreme parameters that may be determined. However, based on very simple statistics, we would expect fully half of these extremes to be exceeded in the next 135 years without any human influence at all. Extreme events will continue to occur naturally."

Exactly - our detailed measurements are over much too short a time frame to say that any small change in a record is significant. Yet the media try to make out there is an "emergency" because of a change in one record.

"Various types of paleoclimate evidence (tree rings, ice cores, lake sediments, etc.) give us some glimpses into events prior to the 19th century and indicate that many ancient extremes appear well outside of our recent experience (i.e. being “worse” than our “worst ever”) – all due to natural dynamical processes." 

CLIMATE CASE OF THE CENTURY - COMPLETE MADNESS!

 This case is due to take place on March 15th with far reaching results for all of us. Below is the background to it:

In The Netherlands there have now been two prominent climate cases. In 2015 Dutch NGO Urgenda won its case against the Dutch state, demanding more ambitious reduction of greenhouse gases. Now Friends of the Earth (FoE) has prevailed against a private company in a climate case. Shell was ordered to adopt corporate policies to reduce the CO2 emissions from the group’s activities by net 45% by the end of 2030 compared to 2019. This reduction obligation applies to the Shell Group’s entire global energy portfolio. Shell must not only reduce its own emissions but also ensure that the emissions of its suppliers and customers (Scope 3 emissions) fall drastically.

 

Sweetheart
The verdict and court documents, reveal that this is some sort of 'sweetheart' case in which the parties agreed on the facts. Shell could hardly defend itself against the alarmist statements put forward by FoE because the company had previously made similar statements. Nowadays, a large, publicly traded company cannot publicly deny the “climate crisis.” If a company were to do so, it would have the media, activists, and a large number of politicians all condemning it. No public company can afford such reputational damage. Climate activists exploit the inability of corporations to defend themselves.

 

FoE in power
With the big win against Shell in its pocket FoE has demanded ambitious 'climate plans' from 30 major Dutch companies, including food companies and even banks and insurance companies. These climate plans have been verified by the “New Climate Institute,” a consultancy known for the “Climate Action Tracker” that has turned climate into a huge revenue model. The result was a red “climate crisis index” rating for the vast majority.

 

These companies face the same dilemma as Shell. If they fight back they will likely suffer huge reputational damage. Shell moved its headquarter from The Hague to London last year, and will receive huge subsidies for CCS-projects (Carbon Capture and Storage) and green hydrogen. Ultimately, the bill for all these 'climate plans' will have to be paid by citizens and Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs). Small companies are already suffering due to high energy prices, which are only partly related to the war in Ukraine and for the rest the result of environmental and climate policies.

 

Intervention by Clintel
Clintel says enough is enough. In October Clintel sent a request to the court of appeal to join the case as a third independent party. Clintel's aim is to make clear that the judge based its verdict on a distorted picture of climate science, the role of the IPCC and the state of the climate. It will also defend the rights of citizens and democracy. 
Not surprisingly, but disappointing nonetheless, both Shell and FoE oppose Clintel‘s proposed intervention. The court ordered a hearing on March 15th 2023 in which Clintel can plead its case.

 

We launched our own special website for this court case: climatecaseofthecentury.org.
Everyone in the world can (free of charge) join our case (as a citizen/lawyer or as a scientist) by filling in a form on the website. The more people participate, the better for making your voices heard. You can also help us by sending this newsletter to other people that might want to join our case. 

Of course, we also need a lot of financial support for this big court case. All the details about how you can contribute are available on climatecaseofthecentury.org. 

We are truly living in extraordinary times. As has been said, above, all this is going to drive up prices which we will all be paying. It will also lead to shortages, as some businesses will go broke. I hope that many of these businesses will help to fund the Clintel legal team, as it is ultimately for their benefit, just as it will be for us. I suspect that there will be huge and complex arguments about what counts as a "carbon emission" and who is responsible for what. All this will lead to long and expensive court cases. It is utter madness brought upon us by foolish governments and courts. It will probably be looked at in future centuries in much the same way as we now see the Spanish inquisition and the Salem witch trials.  

CLIMATE CHANGE BOOKLET FOR ALABAMA STATE (FREE DOWNLOAD)

 For those who are really interested in a thoroughly readable account of climate change, I can thoroughly recommend this download written by Prof John Christy. Here is a man with a passion for the subject and an unsurpassed knowledge and access to data. While the booklet specifically refers to Alabama, much of the content also applies to the world. At around 50 pages it contains many fascinating facts. Here is the link:

AlabamaClimatePracticalGuide_hires.pdf (uah.edu)

I will be highlighting some of the key messages from this book in the coming days.

HURRICANES - MORE EVIDENCE THEY ARE NOT STRONGER OR MORE NUMEROUS

Here is a good rebuttal to the oft repeated propaganda:

 Microsoft Word - AC Rebuttal Hurricanes 122522.docx (wordpress.com)

NEW YORK SEA LEVEL PREDICTIONS LIKELY TO BE MUCH TOO HIGH

 Jan 05, 2023

Will Climate Change Really Put New York Underwater as NASA alarmists predict

By Steven Koonin

A recent (NASA)National Aeronautics and Space Administration report yet again raises alarm that New Yorkers are about to be inundated by rapidly rising seas. But a review of the data suggests that such warnings need to be taken with more than a few grains of sea salt.

The record of sea level measured at the southern tip of Manhattan, known as the Battery, began in 1856. It shows that today’s waters are 19 inches higher than they were 166 years ago, rising an average of 3.5 inches every 30 years. The geologic record shows that this rise began some 20,000 years ago as the last great glaciers melted, causing the New York coastline to move inland more than 50 miles.

There is no question that sea level at the Battery will continue to rise in coming decades, if only because the land has been steadily sinking about 2 inches every 30 years because of factors including tectonic motion, rebound from the mass of the glaciers, and local subsidence. Rather, the question is whether growing human influences on the climate will cause sea level to rise more rapidly. To judge that, we can compare recent rates of rise with those in the past, when human influences were much smaller.

The record shows how much sea level rose during the 30 years prior to each year since 1920. That rise has varied between 1.5 and 6 inches. The 5-inch rise over the most recent 30 years is higher than the century long average but isn’t unprecedented and shows no sign of increasing.

As the Earth warms, changes in sea level at the Battery will depend in part on global changes. These include the loss of ice from mountain glaciers, Greenland and Antarctica as well as the ocean’s expansion as it warms. It’s very difficult to predict these changes - many factors influence ice loss, and the oceans absorb only 0.25% of the heat flowing through the Earth’s climate system. The 30-year rises in the latter half of the 20th century were diminished by about an inch due to the filling of reservoirs behind dams and changes in groundwater around the world.

The Battery’s sea level also depends on local changes in the sea and the sinking of the land. Most important is the natural variability of winds, currents such as the Gulf Stream, salinity and temperatures of the North Atlantic, which cause variations in sea level along the entire U.S. Northeast coast. Because of these many variables, climate models can’t account for the ups and downs so evident in the records.

Despite this, the recent NASA report echoes a February National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report predicting more than 1 foot of rise at the Battery by 2050. Such a rise during the coming 30 years would be more than double the rise over the past 30 years and more than triple the past century’s average. Even more remarkably, the NOAA report says this rise will happen regardless of future greenhouse-gas emissions. There is no way of knowing if this prediction is correct.

So while New Yorkers should watch the waters around them, there is no need to dash to higher ground. The Battery’s sea level hasn’t done anything in recent decades that it hasn’t done over the past century. And although we’ll have to wait three decades to test the predicted 1-foot rise, measurements over the next decade should tell us how quickly we’ll need to raise the seawalls.

Mr. Koonin is a professor at New York University, a senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution, and author of “Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters.”

Read the full post with graphs Here: ICECAP

CLIMATE HISTORY THAT GW PUSHERS WOULD LIKE TO HIDE

 This video is important for anyone who wants to see the whole story of our climate history.

NASA Ministry Of Truth - YouTube

CENTRAL ENGLAND TEMPERATURE RECORD SHOWS WARMING HAS SLOWED DOWN

 Despite all the hype and relentless propaganda from the mainstream media, the actual figures from the CET (Central England Temperature) record shows that warming has slowed. You can see the graph in this article:

Sky’s Extreme Weather Lies | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

HEAT WAVES NOT INCREASING

 It is important to be able to read the evidence to counter the relentless propaganda and there is plenty of it at this link:

Microsoft Word - AC Rebuttal Heat Waves - 040822.docx (wordpress.com)

ANTARCTICA HAS NOT WARMED FOR OVER 70 YEARS

I bet you will not hear this on the main news channels!

 Scientists: Antarctica Has Not Warmed For Over 70 Years (notrickszone.com)

WILL OUR LIVES BE PUT UNDER INCREASING CONTROL BY BIG GOVERNMENT?

Here is an example of the sort of extra control being considered:

 Cut motorway speed limit to 64mph to drive net zero goals, No 10 told | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

We know that even the current 70mph speed limit is not being observed in many parts of the network, so it is unlikely that a small change to 64mph will fare any better. With the governing Conservatives so far behind in the polls it is hard to see them wanting to bring in any more unpopular measures. I am sure that Labour would do it, if they were in power. There lies the problem, there is no winnable alternative. There is the tiny Reform Party, currently at around 7 or 8% support. Voting for them would simply give more seats to Labour.  

OFFICIAL STATEMENT : NO TREND IN STORMS DUE TO CLIMATE CHANGE

 

Here it is from the Met office: There is NO evidence of a  trend in storminess because of climate change. Read the full paragraph below:

Storms 

A total of four storms were named in 2022 but three of them came in the space of a week.  

Storms Dudley, Eunice and Franklin impacted the UK in February 2022, with Storm Eunice resulting in red warnings for wind and saw a new highest maximum gust speed record for England set of 122mph at the Needles on the Isle of Wight.  

Dr Mark McCarthy said: “There’s no evidence of a trend in storminess because of climate change, but this spell of impactful weather in February is certainly noteworthy. It was the first time three named storms had impacted the UK in a week, with Eunice being particularly impactful for much of southern England and Wales.” 

“It’s also noteworthy that there haven’t been any named storms to impact the UK since that week in February.” 

BLACKOUTS WILL LAST FOR DAYS SAYS AUSTRIAN DEFENCE MINISTER

“The question is not whether it (the blackout) will come, but when it will come,” said KlaudiaTanner, the Austrian Defence Minister , blaming the war in Ukraine. No one has spoken this bluntly here in the UK, though there have been warnings that in the case of a prolonged cold spell there is a possibility of cuts. Here are the details:

Blackouts will last for days says Austrian Defence Minister — stock up now « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

BIG INVESTMENT GAINS FROM FOSSIL FUELS, BUT BIG LOSSES FROM RENEWABLES

It is now becoming clear that wind and solar power were just the fashion accessories that no one had to have. Coal, oil and gas were essential. Not only did demand for green energy fall, but the supply fell too. As costs rose, factories struggled to make wind turbines, solar panels, and batteries. Read the details here:

 That’ll hurt: Environmental investors lost 22% in a year when Energy investors made 54% gains « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

HURRICANES - GOOD NEWS TO START THE NEW YEAR!

 Let's hope that 2023 brings us some common sense from our political leaders. We desperately need to have a return to reliable affordable energy. We need an end to the obsession with climate alarm which is why I am highlighting this new research into the intensity and frequency of hurricanes.

Analysis: Hurricanes Have Not Gotten More Intense, Frequent Over Past 170 Years – Watts Up With That?

This is not something you will have heard broadcast on mainstream media. I wonder why not ?

 

HOME HEATING PROBLEMS DUE TO NET ZERO

There is no doubt that eliminating fossil fuels from our home heating is going to be both costly and inconvenient. There will be huge change-over costs followed by increased running costs, whether we are forced down the heat pump route or the hydrogen gas route. 

When the UK chose to move from town gas to natural gas in the 1970's it was a clear benefit as the gas was going to be cheaper. That is clearly not the case here. We still don't know which system our rulers will choose or when or how it will be paid for. 

Here in this linked article we can see a detailed look at the problems with the hydrogen option. 

Conversion of the UK gas system to transport hydrogen - ScienceDirect

CLIMATE MODELS FAIL AGAIN

 We know that climate models spectacularly fail to show the correct amount of warming, running much too hot. See IPCC AR6: Breaking the hegemony of global climate models – Watts Up With That? 

Now we have this: Pacific problems for climate models - Net Zero Watch They find that the models don’t work and don’t work by a great margin. They find the large-scale differences between observed and modelled trends are very unlikely (<5% probability) to occur due to internal variability as represented in models. Conflicting trends are found even in regions with weak multi-decadal variability, suggesting that the climate model inadequacy is profound.

 All in all it would seem that the world would be mad to rip up a reliable energy system using relatively cheap reliable energy from fossil fuels and move to a costly and much less reliable system based on wind and solar.

BOMB CYCLONES NEED REAL ENERGY, NOT HEAT PUMPS AND WIND

There is an interesting discussion going on at Paul Homewood's blog. It's about what sort of energy will be the most reliable when extreme cold weather strikes. The answer, of course, is fossil fuels. Wind and solar are fine as an extra add on, but the more reliant we become on them the more we are liable to be let down when an emergency strikes. 

Imagine you set out in your electric car when you encounter a blocked road. You will have a much smaller amount of energy to keep you warm than someone in a petrol or diesel vehicle, assuming all vehicles were topped up with fuel or electricity. It could make the difference between life or death.

In a modern country we should expect to be resilient to extreme weather with a more and more robust and reliable network. That does not seem to be the case in parts of the USA where the recent extreme cold has left many without heat and electricity. Some of the contributors on this subject are suggesting that political leaders are deliberately rushing to wind solar and EV's knowing that they will cause hardship. 

Personally I find it hard to believe this is true. I suspect they are being misled by advisors who tell them what they want to hear in a modern version of the King's New Clothes story. In the end we know that the king found out the truth and I expect the public will do so too, but, unfortunately, not before a lot of expense and suffering has occurred. Read the details at the link below:   

 US Grid Needs Fossil Fuels, Not Wind | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT (wordpress.com)

IS THE SUN DRIVING OZONE AND CHANGING THE CLIMATE?

Here is an interesting theory to explain the behaviour of the jet stream hence the extreme weather that has been happening in the USA in recent days. 

Is the Sun driving ozone and changing the climate? « JoNova (joannenova.com.au)

TEMPERATURE FIDDLING REVEALED AGAIN

You might think that government temperature records would be an honest display of the data, but in this new video Tony Heller makes a strong case for it to be fabricated. When you cannot trust your government you are in trouble. Watch the video here: 

Are Government Temperature Graphs Correct? - YouTube