The National Climate Assessment has been out nearly a week and the verdict is in: everyone, but everyone – apart from the Obama holdovers who wrote it and the gullible reporters at CNN, theNew York Times and CBS who bigged it up – has recognised it for what it is. A joke.
Here are a few responses:
Climate expert Roger Pielke Jr: “Embarrassing.”
Climate expert Pat Michaels: “Systematically flawed.” Report should be “shelved”.
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore: “The science must be addressed head-on. If POTUS has his reasons for letting this Obama-era committee continue to peddle tripe I wish he would tell us what they are.”
Marc Morano, author of the Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change: “It is a political report masquerading as science. The media is hyping a rehash of frightening climate change claims by Obama administration holdover activist government scientists. The new report is once again pre-determined science. The National Climate Assessment report reads like a press release from environmental pressure groups — because it is! Two key authors are longtime Union of Concerned Scientist activists, Donald Wuebbles and Katharine Hayhoe.”
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued its latest Summary for Policy Makers – and it’s the usual farrago of dubious science, wailing hysteria and worryingly eco-fascistic policy prescriptions.
Sea levels are rising. [As they have been, by the way, at the same harmless pace, for centuries]
The crisis is so dire that even if all the countries stick to their Paris Accord commitments, it still won’t be enough to stop the planet heating by 2 degrees C or more.
Drastic lifestyle changes must be made, drastic carbon emissions cuts must be implemented to stave off further disaster
$2.4 trillion must be spent by 2035 on sustainable energy projects such as wind and solar
Climate-related risks to health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security, and economic growth are projected to increase as the planet warms
Vector borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever will likely increase
One observer – Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation – describes it as the IPCC’s “Hail Mary”: its last, desperate shot at trying to scare a world which just doesn’t care any more.
The first ever audit of the world’s most important temperature data set has found it to be so riddled with errors that it is effectively useless.
HadCRUT4 is the primary dataset used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make its dramatic claims about “man-made global warming”, to justify its demands for trillions of dollars to be spent on “combating climate change” and as the basis for the Paris Climate Accord.
But according to a groundbreaking analysis by Australian researcher John McLean it’s far too sloppy to be taken seriously even by climate scientists, let alone a body as influential as the IPCC or by the governments of the world.
“It’s very careless and amateur,” he says. “About the standard of a first-year university student.”
The Paris Climate Agreement is a dead non-binding treaty walking. All the signatories know this, none of them will admit it. So instead, we have to endure the ritual spectacle of UN delegates racking up yet more air miles and dumping their carbon footprint on a new location in order to wail hysterically that much, much more needs to be done to save the planet from the greatest threat evah.
This week the UN’s clown caravan has moved to Bangkok, Thailand – the preliminary to an even bigger meeting, COP24, in December in Katowice, Poland.
As the South China Morning Postreports, the auguries aren’t good:
Time is running out to save the Paris Agreement, United Nations climate experts warned Tuesday at a key Bangkok meeting, as rich nations were accused of shirking their responsibility for environmental damage.
That’s because – just as they were in Paris 2015 – the negotiations are caught between a rock and a hard place.
Western countries don’t want to stump up for what is essentially an attempted shakedown by poorer countries demanding more handouts in the name of “climate justice.”
A piece by the Daily Telegraph‘s U.S. correspondent David Millward is headlined: ‘Donald Trump should take global warming more seriously – it’s his voters in red states who suffer most’.
This clickbait drivel needs debunking and, as usual, Paul Homewood has done a fine job.
The Telegraph’s claims are in bold. Homewood’s comments follow. Useful rebuttals to have at your fingertips next time some climate loon tries it on…
1. Maine’s fishermen hit as lobsters and cod flee north
Warming sea waters have seen lobsters migrate north. The same has been happening with cod – which are now in scant supply in Cape Cod. Melting ice caps and changing current patterns are threatening to have a devastating impact on the fishing industry.
GHGs cannot have any measurable effect on the temperature of deep oceans, it is simply not physically possible. Oceanographer, Dr Robert E Stevenson, explained this succinctly here.
Warmer seas there are purely the result of oceanic currents, which change all the time.
HH Lamb wrote about many of these changes in “Climate, History and the Modern World”. For instance, cod were plentiful even off west Greenland during the Middle Ages, but were forced to migrate to warmer waters during the Little Ice Age.
More recently, during the 1960s, Greenland cod again migrated to warmer waters.
2. Florida and Texas ravaged by some of the worst hurricanes evah
“Donald Trump has broken the climate spell,” says a must-readarticle by Rupert Darwall. [Rather surprisingly, it’s in the NeverTrump Weekly Standard].
He’s right. And it’s an apt metaphor, too. For decades, it’s as if the entire civilized world has been under the grip of a malign spell cast by an evil green wizard.
This evil green wizard is a shape-shifter who has taken many forms – sometimes, adopting the blubbery physique of Al Gore or the wizened, yoga-loving, soft-porn-writing frame of railway engineer Rajendra Pachauri; sometimes that of the moustachioed Canadian Marxist Maurice Strong; sometimes that of the hollow orator Barack Obama, or the comedy data-manipulator and faux-Nobel-Prizewinner Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann…
All these characters are just different facets of the same problem though: the suicide mission – devised by a handful of influential zealots and enthusiastically embraced by far too many politicians, academics, celebrities, lawyers, corporatists, scientists, apparatchiks and journalists – to make the global economy “transition” from fossil fuel to renewable energy.
What makes Trump so remarkable is that he is the first political leader of consequence to stand up against this seemingly unstoppable tide.