Welcome, Guest. Please Login
Conservative Chit Chat: A Place to discuss politics
The Forum is moving to a new space integrated into the Wordpress Blog, but this old place will remain here for posterity (or in case the wordpress doesn't work out).
  Policy Page Main Site Home Blogs Books Conservative ChitChat Gazette USA boards Merchandise AlltheInterweb Answers Links Directory HelpLoginSearch  
Post Reply
Open Live Preview Live Preview

You can resize the message area by dragging the right- or bottom border.
Max 3500 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features


Topic Summary - Displaying 15 post(s).
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2019 at 4:56pm
Top Climate Scientist Criticizes ‘Nonsense’ Of ‘Global Warming Crisis’
A highly qualified and experienced climate modeler with impeccable credentials has rejected the unscientific bases of the doom-mongering over a purported climate crisis.

His work has not yet been picked up in this country, but that is about to change.

Writing in the Australian site Quadrant, Tony Thomas introduces the English-Speaking world to the truth-telling of Dr. Mototaka Nakamura. (hat tip: Andrew Bolt, John McMahon)

There’s a top-level oceanographer and meteorologist who is  prepared to cry “Nonsense!”on the “global warming crisis” evident to climate modellers but not in the real world.

He’s as well or better qualified than the modellers he criticises — the ones whose Year 2100 forebodings of 4degC warming have set the world to spending $US1.5 trillion a year to combat CO2 emissions.

The iconoclast is Dr. Mototaka Nakamura. In June he put out a small book in Japanese on “the sorry state of climate science”. It’s titled Confessions of a climate scientist: the global warming hypothesis is an unproven hypothesis, and he is very much qualified to take a stand.

From 1990 to 2014 he worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales. His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Centre, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology. He’s published about 20 climate papers on fluid dynamics.

Today’s vast panoply of “global warming science” is like an upside down pyramid built on the work of a few score of serious climate modellers. They claim to have demonstrated human-derived CO2 emissions as the cause of recent global warming and project that warming forward. Every orthodox climate researcher takes such output from the modellers’ black boxes as a given.

Read More....
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2019 at 4:49pm
ConservativeChitChat has a new policy page for Climate, Environment and Conservation issues HERE on the Blogs.

We also have a new Daily Newsletter for Climate and Conservation on Paper.li alongside our existing ones.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2019 at 4:41pm
Climate Scientists Write To UN: There Is No Climate Emergency
A group of 500 esteemed scientists and professionals in climate science have officially notified the United Nations that there is no climate crisis and that spending trillions on a non-problem is ‘cruel and imprudent’.
This letter will not make it into national or global media, nor will it cause the UN to change its ways. If these same scientists understood Technocracy, they would change their battle strategy. ⁃ TN Editor

Read More....
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 21st, 2019 at 12:03am
Useful comment above an article I saw earlier in the year and been meaning to tag up on this thread:
The fact is, there has been global warming, but the contribution of human-generated carbon dioxide is necessarily so small as to be all but undetectable. Here's why:

Carbon dioxide, considered the main vector for human-caused global warming, is some 0.04% of the atmosphere by volume, or some 400 parts per million (ppm)[1]. Water vapor varies from 0% to 4% by volume[2], and so should easily average above 1%[3] near the Earth’s surface, where the greenhouse effect would be most important, and is about three times more effective[4] a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So water vapor is some 25 times more prevalent and three times more effective; that makes it some 75 times more important to the greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide[5]. The TOTAL contribution of carbon dioxide to the greenhouse effect is therefore 0.013 or less.

Since the start of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide is estimated to have risen from 280 ppm to the current approximately 400 ppm. Even if the entire increase were the result of human emissions - which is by no means certain, given uncertainty about how much CO2 is produced by natural sources such as decomposition of biomass and carbonate rock, volcanism and the little-understood ocean-atmosphere exchange - the total human contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide would be about 0.3 of the total. Therefore human carbon dioxide adds at most only 0.0039 of the greenhouse effect, and may well be less.

Total warming of the Earth by the greenhouse effect is widely accepted as about 33 degrees Centigrade or 59 degrees Fahrenheit, raising average temperature to 15 degrees Centigrade, or 59 degrees above zero Fahrenheit. So the contribution of anthropogenic carbon dioxide is at most 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit, or at most 0.13 degree Centigrade, and perhaps considerably less. Global warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution is thought by many to be perhaps 0.8 to1.0 degree Centigrade.
But that's only the beginning. We've had global warming for more than 10,000 years, since the end of the last Ice Age, and there is evidence temperatures were actually somewhat warmer 9,000 years ago and again 4,500 to 8,000 years ago than they are today[6]. Whatever caused that, it was not human activity. It was not all those power plants and factories and SUVs being operated by Stone Age cavemen while chipping arrowheads out of bits of flint. Whatever the cause was, it melted the glaciers that in North America once extended south to Long Island and parts of New York City[7] into virtually complete disappearance (except for a few mountain remnants). That's one big greenhouse effect! If we are still having global warming - and I suppose we could presume we are, given this more than 10,000 year history - it seems highly likely that it is still the overwhelmingly primary cause of continued warming, rather than our piddling 0.0039 contribution to the greenhouse effect.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Oct 7th, 2018 at 12:39pm
Climate Bombshell: Global Warming Scare Is Based on ‘Careless and Amateur’ Data, Finds Audit
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.
Read More.....
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Dec 21st, 2015 at 4:39pm
Climate change shock: Burning fossil fuels 'COOLS planet', says NASA
Major theories about what causes temperatures to rise have been thrown into doubt after NASA found the Earth has cooled in areas of heavy industrialisation where more trees have been lost and more fossil fuel burning takes place.

Environmentalists have long argued the burning of fossil fuels in power stations and for other uses is responsible for global warming and predicted temperature increases because of the high levels of carbon dioxide produced - which causes the global greenhouse effect.

Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Dec 14th, 2015 at 12:36am
Admin-JD wrote on Dec 14th, 2015 at 12:32am:
Why the Paris climate treaty will be the flop of the year
Read Full Article...

And indeed it was....
The Paris Climate deal addresses 1pc of the problem. How is that a victory?
The  Paris deal promises to keep temperature rises below 2°C. However, the actual promises made here will do almost nothing to achieve that. It is widely accepted that to keep temperature rises below 2°C, we have to reduce CO₂ emissions by 6,000Gt. The UNFCCC estimates that if every country makes every single promised Paris deal carbon cut by 2030 to the fullest extent possible and there is no carbon leakage, CO₂ emissions will be cut by 56 Gt by 2030.

The maths is simple: in an implausibly optimistic best-case scenario, Paris leaves 99pc of the problem in place. To say that Paris will get us to “well below 2°C” is cynical posturing at best. It relies on wishful thinking. It’s like going on a diet to slim down, but declaring victory after the first salad.

Read more....
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Dec 14th, 2015 at 12:32am
Why the Paris climate treaty will be the flop of the year
Now, as Paris approaches – although scarcely noticed by the Western media – we can see just what the 20 countries responsible for 81 per cent of global CO2 emissions are proposing as their “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” to cutting emissions by 2030. These have been meticulously analysed on the Notalotofpeopleknowthat website, with further reporting on that site of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.
China, now easily the world’s largest emitter, contributing 24 per cent of the total, plans by 2030 to double its CO2 emissions, not least by building 363 more coal-fired power stations. India, now the third-largest emitter, plans by 2030 to treble its emissions. The fourth-largest emitter, Russia, despite slashing its emissions after 1990 by closing down much of its old Soviet industry, now proposes to increase them from their 2012 level by up to 38 per cent.
Japan, the fifth-largest emitter, does claim that it will cut its emissions by some 15 per cent, but is still planning to build more coal-fired power plants. Although South Korea, the world’s seventh-largest emitter, claims that it will cut emissions by 23 per cent (not least by buying “carbon credits” that will allow it to “offset” its continuing production of CO2 for cash), even its proposed target will still be 100 per cent higher than it was 25 years ago.
As for the Middle East, the oil states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran (the eighth and ninth-largest emitters) have not yet submitted any proposals. But the United Arab Emirates, which have more than doubled their emissions since 2002, show no sign of slowing that increase, apart from a promise to invest in more “carbon-free” solar and nuclear power. As for Brazil, which as the 11th largest emitter has been rapidly increasing its dependence on fossil fuels, it sees its main contribution as being to slow the felling and burning of the Amazon rainforest.

So which countries are obviously missing from this list? President Obama may talk the talk about his ambitious plans for the US, the world’s second-largest emitter. But there is no more chance of Congress agreeing to the proposed treaty than there was in 1997, when the Senate unanimously voted no to Kyoto.
All of which leaves the EU as the only part of the world committed to cutting its emissions by 40 per cent within 15 years. Even here, Poland is already refusing to sign the treaty, as it builds more fossil-fuel power stations to keep its lights on, while Germany, the sixth-largest emitter does the same.
The only government in the world wholly committed to meeting that 40 per cent target by 2030 is Britain, the 14th-largest emitter, responsible for just 1.3 per cent of global emissions. This is less than China or India are now adding every year, as we shut down those fossil-fuel power plants that still manage to provide 70 per cent of our electricity.

Read Full Article...
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Nov 24th, 2015 at 3:49pm
German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On ‘Unbelievable’ Scale
A German professor has confirmed what skeptics from Britain to the US have long suspected: that NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has largely invented “global warming” by tampering with the raw temperature data records.

Professor Dr. Friedrich Karl Ewert is a retired geologist and data computation expert. He has painstakingly examined and tabulated all NASA GISS’s temperature data series, taken from 1153 stations and going back to 1881. His conclusion: that if you look at the raw data, as opposed to NASA’s revisions, you’ll find that since 1940 the planet has been cooling, not warming.

Read More.....
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Oct 13th, 2015 at 8:16pm
The climate models used by alarmist scientists to predict global warming are getting worse, not better; carbon dioxide does far more good than harm; and President Obama has backed the “wrong side” in the war on “climate change.”

So says one of the world’s greatest theoretical physicists, Dr Freeman Dyson (pictured above), the British-born, naturalised American citizen who worked at Princeton University as a contemporary of Einstein and has advised the US government on a wide range of scientific and technical issues.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Oct 2nd, 2015 at 8:01pm
Global warming SHOCK: Earth’s natural coolant could be TWICE as powerful as first thought
A NATURAL cooling process which reverses the effects of global warming could be nearly TWICE as powerful as scientists previously believed.

Research has identified a natural system where volatile organic compounds (VOC) are emitted into the air from the sea.

These VOCs cause the climate to cool and may explain why world temperatures have remained stable for around 15 years, despite widespread claims that global warming is out of control.

The German government's Leibniz Institute for Tropospheric Research found a key VOC known as Isoprene, which was only thought to have been produced by living organisms such as plankton, is actually also created by the sun hitting chemicals at the top of the ocean.

Measurements had estimated 1.9 megatons of isoprene was emitted each year but the new, groundbreaking discovery shows an increase of between 0.2 and 3.5 megatons annually.
Critics of climate change say the research - published in the journal Environmental Science and Technology - throws previous estimates of rising temperatures into doubt.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2015 at 5:44pm
For daily doses of Environmental news, subscribe to our sister site's Green Crap News Newsletter.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2015 at 5:42pm
Also while the forums were glitching.....
Climate change has saved hundreds of thousands of Africans from extreme poverty, starvation and premature death, a study from Arizona State University has confirmed.

The study shows that the West African Sahel – part of the semiarid strip just south of the Sahara desert, which spans the African continent from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea – has been steadily “regreening” since the severe droughts of the 1970s and 1980s which killed more than 100,000 people.

Among the reasons for the “regreening” are increased rainfall, the beneficial effects of increased atmospheric CO2 on plant growth and the ingenuity of farmers (“community-led conservation efforts) in this harsh, marginal region.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Sep 24th, 2015 at 5:40pm
While the forums were suffering from technical gremlins, a global warmingist made this confession:
Burn ALL the COAL, OIL – NO danger of SEA LEVEL rise this century from Antarctic ice melt
One of the world's most firmly global-warmist scientists says that even if humanity deliberately sets out to burn all the fossil fuels it can find, as fast as it can, there will be no troublesome sea level rise due to melting Antarctic ice this century.

Dr Ken Caldeira's credentials as a global warmist are impeccable. He is not a true green hardliner - he has signed a plea to his fellow greens to get over their objections to nuclear power, for instance, and he doesn't totally rule out geoengineering as a possible global-warming solution. But that's as far as he'll go: in Dr Caldeira's view, it is plain and simple unethical to release greenhouse gases into the air. There's no middle ground on that as far as he's concerned - he's not OK with gas power as an alternative to coal, for instance.

Alternate article.....
Or at least as close to nothing as makes no difference – says a new study published at Science Advances.

If we were to burn all the world’s coal and all the world’s oil tomorrow, the resultant effect on the Antarctic ice sheet – the biggest body of ice on the planet – would be to cause sea levels to rise by the end of this century by just 8cm.

What this means, in other words, is that even were the doomiest of doomsday predictions about climate change and rising sea levels to come true, they would take place on a timescale so slow that no one alive on the planet right now would be remotely affected.

Nor their children, nor their grandchildren, nor their great-grandchildren. It will take till at least 2200 for sea levels to rise even a metre – giving our ingenious future generations plenty of time to build their escape space ships, or roll up their trouser legs, or move a half a mile inland, or whatever they deem necessary to cope with the gently-rising waters.
Posted by: Admin-JD  Mark & Quote Posted on: Apr 22nd, 2015 at 4:10pm
'We could DOUBLE Co2 emissions and still NOT reach critical global warming limit'
MANKIND could DOUBLE its carbon dioxide emissions and the Earth still WON'T reach a critical level of global warming, claims researcher Dr Benny Peiser.

The planet is currently in the midst of a so-called warming pause, with satellite measurements showing that the surface temperature may not have risen for just over 18 years.

Despite this apparent hiatus in temperature rising, leaders from around the world are due to meet in Paris later this year for the United Nations Climate Summit.

The leaders are expected to reaffirm their target of keeping the global average temperature within 2°C of pre-industrial levels.

Speaking ahead of the conference, Dr Peiser, the director of the Global Warming Policy Forum - a think tank set up to challenge the policies envisaged by governments to mitigate global warming - described this target as reasonable although he suggested that it should remain flexible to reflect the unpredictability of climate change.

However, he also claimed that with our current rates of carbon dioxide (Co2) emissions, we could be nowhere near to reaching that critical level.

Read the rest of it...
AlltheInterweb | AlltheInterweb Directory | AlltheInterweb Search | More Forums
ConservativeChitChat.co.uk | ConservativeChitChat USA | ConservativeChitChat Scotland