GWPF | 15 Jan 2016
Fred Hoyle & Chandra Wickramasinghe Vindicated
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. –Mahatma Gandhi
In a CCNet-Essay written nearly 20 years ago, Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe emphasised that mankind’s ability to inject greenhouse gases into the atmosphere was essential to “maintaining the present advantageous world climate, the opposite of what environmentalists are erroneously advocating.” A new study has vindicated their climate scepticism yet again. —Global Warming Policy Forum, 15 January 2016
1) Fred Hoyle & Chandra Wickramasinghe Vindicated
Global Warming Policy Forum, 15 January 2016
2) Mankind’s CO2 Emissions May Delay Next Ice Age – Study
Agence France Presse, 14 January 2016
3) Captain Marvel Comes Unstuck
Bishop Hill, 8 January 2016
4) Corporate Leaders Still Sceptical About Climate Alarmism
The Guardian, 15 January 2016
5) At Last: EU Commission Isolating Green NGOs
EurActiv, 15 January 2016
6) David Cameron Challenged On Climate Policies
BBC News, 12 January 2016
7) Climate Alarmists Invent New Excuse: The Satellites Are Lying
Breitbart London, 15 January 2016
Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere could override other influences to make this the longest inter-ice age period in Earth history, they wrote in the journal Nature. Without human influence, the next ice age was probably about 50,000 years away anyway, wrote the team led by Andrey Ganopolski of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. —Agence France Presse, 14 January 2016
While everyone else was out partying on Hogmanay, Bob Ward was hard at work *writing tweets about global warming. Let noone say he is not a strangely obsessive personality. This was a bit of a silly thing for Bob to say though because I had written a post about the said paper, by Marvel et al, some two weeks earlier, noting that it looked a bit unphysical in places. Anyway, it turns out that the reason that no more detailed response has appeared was that there was so much wrong with the study that it just took a very long time to collate all the problems into a single document. And oh boy is the Marvel paper a shambles. There is so much wrong that Nic has had to make a condensed version available as well, and even that runs to two pages! Perhaps I should just publish his final sentence here. “Their study lacks credibility.” –Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 8 January 2016
Too many people in the corporate sector are still in denial about climate change, according to Katherine Garrett-Cox, the CEO of investment firm Alliance Trust. Speaking at a Guardian Sustainable Business debate on the role of business in tackling climate change, she said: “Within the last 12 months, I’ve had conversations with CEOs of major corporates in Europe and they just say, ‘It’s not real, it’s not something I should be bothered about’.” It is “scary” how little discussion there is at boardroom level about whether climate change is a risk at all, she added. –Emma Howard, The Guardian, 15 January 2016
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker did not meet a single green NGO in 2015, but found time for one-on-one meetings with 18 business and industry organisations. Juncker’s website shows 29 meetings from 22 January to 10 December 2015. The apparent bias will be seized on by those who accuse the Commission of not caring about the environment, and prioritising business interests. Jeremy Wates, the Secretary General of the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), said, “It’s a sad fact that President Juncker has shown little interest in the environment. To our knowledge, in the 14 months since he has taken office , he has not had a single meeting with any environmental organisation.” –James Crisp, EurActiv, 15 January 2016
The Prime Minister has been accused of double standards over climate change, ahead of a Commons committee appearance. Select committee chairmen Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour) and Angus MacNeil (SNP) said he has scrapped UK schemes aimed at cutting emissions, despite pledging internationally to protect the climate. They singled out the decision to axe a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project promised in the Tory manifesto. The decision to scrap the CCS trial was applauded by Nigel Lawson’s pressure group, the Global Warming Policy Forum. Its spokesman Benny Peiser told the BBC: “Worldwide, there are currently more than 20 pilot projects being funded. Let’s wait and see whether the controversial technology will ever be viable at large scale. If so, Britain could simply buy it off the shelf if need be.” –Roger Harrabin, BBC News, 12 January 2016
The climate alarmists have come up with a brilliant new excuse to explain why there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years. Turns out the satellite data is lying. –James Delingpole, Breitbart London, 15 January 2016
1) Fred Hoyle & Chandra Wickramasinghe Vindicated
Global Warming Policy Forum, 15 January 2016
In a CCNet-Essay written nearly 20 years ago, Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe emphasised that mankind’s ability to inject greenhouse gases into the atmosphere was essential to “maintaining the present advantageous world climate, the opposite of what environmentalists are erroneously advocating.” A new study has vindicated their climate scepticism yet again.
CCNet-ESSAY (July 1999): ON THE CAUSE OF ICE-AGES
By Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe
The greenhouse effect raises the Earth’s temperature by about 40oC above what it would otherwise have been. Without the greenhouse effect the Earth would be locked into a permanent ice-age. This fact gives the lie to those renegade scientists, who in their anxiety to get their hands into the public purse, are seeking to persuade the public that the greenhouse effect is a bad thing greatly to be feared. The reverse is true. The greenhouse effect is an exceedingly good thing, without which those of us who happen to live in Britain would be buried under several hundreds of metres of ice. […]
The renewal of ice-age conditions would render a large fraction of the world’s major food-growing areas inoperable, and so would inevitably lead to the extinction of most of the present human population. Since bolide impacts cannot be called up to order, we must look to a sustained greenhouse effect to maintain the present advantageous world climate. This implies the ability to inject effective greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the opposite of what environmentalists are erroneously advocating.
2) Mankind’s CO2 Emissions May Delay Next Ice Age – Study
Agence France Presse, 14 January 2016
Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere could override other influences to make this the longest inter-ice age period in Earth history
Human-driven climate change may have put the next ice age off by about 50,000 years, said scientists Thursday, January 14, highlighting our species’ ever-more dominant influence on Earth’s natural cycles.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere could override other influences to make this the longest inter-ice age period in Earth history, they wrote in the journal Nature.
Without human influence, the next ice age was probably about 50,000 years away anyway, wrote the team led by Andrey Ganopolski of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.
But current trends of CO2 emissions from humans burning oil, coal and gas, “are already sufficient to postpone the next ice age for another 50,000 years,” he said.
“The bottom line is that we are basically skipping a whole glacial cycle, which is unprecedented.”
Ice ages are caused partly by changes in Sun exposure caused by natural variations in the Earth’s orbit, combined with the influence of planet-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Temperate “interglacial” periods normally last about 20,000 to 30,000 years, according to scientists. Once every 400,000 years or so, an inter-ice age period will last longer than that.
The last ice age ended between 14,000 and 11,000 years ago, giving rise to the Holocene, Earth’s current geological period, which has been an unusually mild inter-ice age era.
3) Andrew Montford: Captain Marvel Comes Unstuck
Bishop Hill, 8 January 2016
While everyone else was out partying on Hogmanay, Bob Ward was hard at work writing tweets about global warming. Let noone say he is not a strangely obsessive personality.
This was a bit of a silly thing for Bob to say though because I had written a post about the said paper, by Marvel et al, some two weeks earlier, noting that it looked a bit unphysical in places.
Anyway, it turns out that the reason that no more detailed response has appeared was that there was so much wrong with the study that it just took a very long time to collate all the problems into a single document. Nic Lewis has now published his thoughts at Climate Audit. And oh boy is the Marvel paper a shambles. There is so much wrong that Nic has had to make a condensed version available as well, and even that runs to two pages! Perhaps I should just publish his final sentence here.
“Their study lacks credibility.”
4) Corporate Leaders Still Sceptical About Climate Alarmism
The Guardian, 15 January 2016
Emma Howard
Too many people in the corporate sector are still in denial about climate change, according to Katherine Garrett-Cox, the CEO of investment firm Alliance Trust.
Speaking at a Guardian Sustainable Business debate on the role of business in tackling climate change, Garrett-Cox, herself an outspoken advocate on the issue, said: “Within the last 12 months, I’ve had conversations with CEOs of major corporates in Europe and they just say, ‘It’s not real, it’s not something I should be bothered about’.” It is “scary” how little discussion there is at boardroom level about whether climate change is a risk at all, she added.
One month on from a landmark climate change deal at UN talks in Paris, Garrett-Cox hopes this will be the tipping point for businesses waking up to climate change. Ikea’s sustainability chief Steve Howard agreed, saying 2016 presents the corporate world with “an unprecedented opportunity” to reinvent its business models in line with the challenge.
However, speaking at the event, the UK’s only Green party MP Caroline Lucas said the government was making this transition more difficult: “This is a government that doesn’t like scrutiny … and that’s part of the whole way it’s going about its green policies.”
The UK government has been widely criticised since its election in May for making a series of changes to environmental policy such as scrapping subsidies for onshore wind, ending the green deal scheme that helps homeowners insulate their homes and cutting support for the solar industry, which has since seen a number of firms going into liquidation.
5) At Last: EU Commission Isolating Green NGOs
EurActiv, 15 January 2016
James Crisp
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker did not meet a single green NGO in 2015, but found time for one-on-one meetings with 18 business and industry organisations.
Juncker’s website shows 29 meetings from 22 January to 10 December 2015. The apparent bias will be seized on by those who accuse the Commission of not caring about the environment, and prioritising business interests.
Jeremy Wates is Secretary General of the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), which is Europe’s largest federation of environmental citizens’ organisations. It is also a member of the Green 10, a grouping of the most influential Brussels environment NGOs.
He said, “It’s a sad fact that President Juncker has shown little interest in the environment. To our knowledge, in the 14 months since he has taken office , he has not had a single meeting with any environmental organisation.”
“It’s not double figures but there have been several requests from EEB and Green 10 and we have never had a positive response to any of them. It does have a chilling effect,” said Wates, “We hope that this will change.”
6) David Cameron Challenged On Climate Policies
BBC News, 12 January 2016
Roger Harrabin
The PM has been accused of double standards over climate change, ahead of a Commons committee appearance.
Select committee chairmen Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour) and Angus MacNeil (SNP) said he has scrapped UK schemes aimed at cutting emissions, despite pledging internationally to protect the climate.
They singled out the decision to axe a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project promised in the Tory manifesto.
The government said the CCS scheme had always been “subject to affordability”.
David Cameron is due before the Commons Liaison Committee later, which is made up of MPs who chair Commons select committees…
Mr MacNeil, who chairs the energy and climate change committee, told BBC News the decision to scrap the CCS fund was incomprehensible…
The decision to scrap the CCS trial was applauded by Nigel Lawson’s pressure group, the Global Warming Policy Forum.
Its spokesman Benny Peiser told the BBC: “Worldwide, there are currently more than 20 pilot projects being funded.
“Let’s wait and see whether the controversial technology will ever be viable at large scale. If so, Britain could simply buy it off the shelf if need be.”
But Professor Dieter Helm, from Oxford University, a supporter of many of the government’s other energy reforms, said: “It’s a no-brainer that the shallow North Sea is the place to try out CCS, with lots of empty holes, pipelines, experience and gas plants nearby.
“So the question is really whether the UK cares about the climate change problem or is merely trying to achieve its carbon production targets at minimum cost.”
7) Climate Alarmists Invent New Excuse: The Satellites Are Lying
Breitbart London, 15 January 2016
James Delingpole
The climate alarmists have come up with a brilliant new excuse to explain why there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years. Turns out the satellite data is lying.
And to prove it they’ve come up with a glossy new video starring such entirely trustworthy and not at all biased climate experts as Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann , Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth and Ben Santer. (All of these paragons of scientific rectitude feature heavily in the Climategate emails)
The video is well produced and cleverly constructed – designed to look measured and reasonable rather than yet another shoddy hit job in the ongoing climate wars.
Sundry “experts”, adopting a tone of “more in sorrow than anger” gently express their reservations about the reliability of the satellite data which, right up until the release of this video, has generally been accepted as the most accurate gauge of global temperatures.
This accuracy was acknowledged 25 years ago by NASA, which said that “satellite analysis of the upper atmosphere is more accurate, and should be adopted as the standard way to monitor temperature change.”
More recently, though, climate alarmists have grown increasingly resentful of the satellite temperature record because of its pesky refusal to show the warming trend they’d like it to show. Instead of warming, the RSS and UAH satellite data shows that the earth’s temperatures have remained flat for over 18 years – the so-called “Pause.”
Hence the alarmists’ preference for the land- and sea-based temperature datasets which do show a warming trend – especially after the raw data has been adjusted in the right direction. […]
In the video, the line taken by the alarmists is that the satellite records too have been subject to dishonest adjustments and that the satellites have given a misleading impression of global temperature because of the way their orbital position changes over time.
These sound plausible criticisms till you look at this graph provided by one of the scientists criticized in the video, John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville.
What it shows is a comparison between the average land temperature measurements and the satellite measurements. Clearly, the land measurements show a much steeper warming trend than the satellite data. More pertinent, though, is how closely the satellite data corresponds with measurements taken using a completely independent system – balloons.
Christy told Breitbart:
There are too many problems with the video on which to comment, but here are a few.
First, the satellite problems mentioned here were dealt with 10 to 20 years ago. Second, the main product we use now for greenhouse model validation is the temperature of the Mid-Troposphere (TMT) which was not erroneously impacted by these problems.
The vertical “fall” and east-west “drift” of the spacecraft are two aspects of the same phenomenon – orbital decay.
The real confirmation bias brought up by these folks to smear us is held by them. They are the ones ignoring information to suit their world view. Do they ever say that, unlike the surface data, the satellite datasets can be checked by a completely independent system – balloons? Do they ever say that one of the main corrections for time-of-day (east-west) drift is to remove spurious WARMING after 2000? Do they ever say that the important adjustment to address the variations caused by solar-shadowing effects on the spacecraft is to remove a spurious WARMING? Do they ever say that the adjustments were within the margin of error?
He adds:
I’m impressed someone went to so much trouble and expense. The “satellite data” must be a real problem for someone. Do we know who financed this video?
Yes, we do. It was made by the Yale Climate Connection and part funded by the Grantham Foundation. The Grantham Foundation is the creation of a UK born US based hedge funder called Jeremy Grantham (and his wife Hannelore) and has since 1997 been at the forefront of promoting climate alarmism.
Among the beneficiaries of Grantham’s green largesse are Lord Stern — author of the heavily discredited Stern Report, now with a cosy sinecure at the Grantham Institute — and Bob Ward, a failed paleopiezometrist and crop-headed pit bull impersonator who is lavishly funded to write angry letters to newspapers and other institutions explaining in boring detail why climate change sceptics are evil and wrong.
