Filed under: Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Progressivism, Science/Technology | Tags: James Delingpole, Junk Science, Ocean Acidification
James Delingpole, British writer, rants regularly at Breitbart about the utter goofiness of the world’s climate true believers. He wrote today about a climate “science” scam that keeps on rearing its ugly head, in spite of being debunked thoroughly over and over.
Aside from the need to debunk once more, it’s a classic example of the workings of climate science. In this case, one of Delingpole’s articles was supposedly debunked in The Marine Biologist (the magazine of the marine biologist community). He wrote:
There was a time when I would have just ignored it: the guy who wrote it – one Phil Williamson – is the embodiment of Upton Sinclair’s dictum that “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
Not only is Williamson based at the “University” of East Anglia – aka Climate Alarmism Central, heavily featured in the Climategate scandal – but since 2010 he has been paid as Science Coordinator of the UK Ocean Acidification research programme. This project has received around £12.5 million of UK government funding, most is provided by the Natural Environment Research Council (for which conveniently Williamson also works).
Dr. Robert (Bob) Carter, the late Australian Marine Geologist, laughed once and said “As long as there are rocks in the ocean, it will never be acid.” (that may not be an exact quote, but close), the sensible message stuck with me.
Many climate scientists who are based at one university or another find the drive do battle with “global warming” has financed a new and important department, the needed equipment, and the advocacy keeps drawing taxpayer funding to support it. It’s all a very incestuous scheme that should be considered scandalous, were they not so serious about it all.
Climate Change, says Delingpole “represents a global industry worth around $1.5 trillion — all of this predicated on the notion that man-made carbon dioxide is a problem because it causes catastrophic global warming. Now clearly if — as seems to be increasingly likely — CO2 turns out to be just a harmless trace gas whose influence on climate is marginal, than an awful lot of vested interests are going to be heavily out of pocket. Hence the appeal to the vast climate alarmist conspiracy of Ocean Acidification; the handy theory which ensures that even if global warming doesn’t happen, there will still be plenty of snout-space at the trough for all those rent-seekers, crooks, green-heads, scamsters and shills involved in the “decarbonisation” industry.”
Do read Mr. Delingpole’s whole piece. They are always great fun, but full of good information as well. I think he really relishes the role of “debunker.”
Filed under: Asia, Bureaucracy, China, Developing Nations, Economy, Environment, Foreign Policy, Global Warming, India, Japan, Junk Science, Media Bias, Politics, The United States | Tags: Climate Conference COP21, Fantasy and Belief, James Delingpole
The report of the President’s response to the jihadist attack in San Bernardino should give you pause. As soon as he realized that some would classify the killing in San Bernardino as a terrorist attack, he called together his National Security Council and the heads of federal law enforcement agencies to discuss a public relations strategy. A designation of the killing as a terrorist attack would threaten to upset his “strategy” in Syria.
The President of the United States has declared publicly, 22 times, that climate change is a greater threat by far than Islamic terrorism: Jan. 15, 2008; Jan 26, 2000; May 2010; Sept.6, 2012; Jan 23, 2013; Feb. 16, 2014; June, 2014; Sept. 2014; Sept 24, 2014; Oct. 29, 2014; 2015 State of the Union address; Feb. 2015; Feb. 09, 2015, Feb. 10, 2015, April 18, 2015; May, 2015; May 20 2015; July 13, 2015; Defense Dept report, July 29, 2015; Aug 28, 2015; September UN 2015; Sept.28, 2015 at the United Nations, he said “No country can escape the ravages of climate change.”
The Big Climate Meeting: COP 21, has concluded. The negotiators have thrashed out their final details. The agreement will make no difference whatsoever to “climate change,” and the total effects will be another very expensive meeting to be held in Marrakesh, Morocco next year.
As James Delingpole, who is always correct, said, “All that stuff you’ve read and heard about “time running out,” “deadlock,” “last minute deals,” — it’s all a charade, everything was pre-ordained. COP is not really about saving the planet, it’s a massive jobs fair for activists, shyster politicians, bureaucrats, and people with otherwise worthless degrees in “sustainability,” “conservation biology,” and “ecology.”
He adds that “No serious person in the world believes in man-made climate change any more. They just don’t. Only people like Secretary of State John Kerry — who has staked the reputation of the Obama presidency on how well it deals with this non-existent problem.” Delingpole adds “If you live by fairies you will die by fairies.”
We said in the beginning that China and India aren’t about to sign on to any plan eliminating or reducing their efforts to industrialize and their need for cheap energy. China is building one new coal-fired power plant every 7 to 10 days, while Japan plans to build 43 coal-fired power projects to replace its Fukushima nuclear plant, which killed 19,000 people and destroyed 150,000 buildings. India has some 500 coal-fired power plants planned.
The stated aim of the meeting was to prevent the earth’s temperature from rising more than 2º C. above pre-industrial levels. If all the world’s leading nations stick to the carbon-reduction commitments they will make (which are totally not binding) then they will stave off ‘global warming’ by the end of this century by 17 one hundredths of one degree C. (0.170º C.) That is the “optimistic scenario,” assuming that nobody’s lying.
The annual cost to the global economy is approximately $1.5 trillion. As Ebeneezer Scrooge said, Bah Humbug!
“We met the moment,” Obama said. “We may not live to see the full realization of our achievement but that’s OK,: he said. “What matters is that today we can be more confident this planet will be in better shape for the next generation.”
So there you go. Nothing binding. Opt-outs written in. Totally fake agreement. What more could you ask for, if you are trying to decorate your legacy? But they will have another big meeting next year, and the year after…
Nevertheless, the press, totally invested in saving the earth, as you hear from them constantly, erupted with delight:
(h/t: T. Becket Adams)
Filed under: Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Politics | Tags: Climate Change, James Delingpole, New York Times Environment Desk
The president declares that it’s not about spending. But over at the New York Times, when the revenues are down, they immediately tackle — the spending. Of course the lack of actual global warming means the New York Times environmental desk is being closed. No more environment editor, no more deputy environment editor, no seven reporters and two editors. They are being assigned to other departments.
Over at Ricochet, Britain’s James Delingpole, who is always right, piles on. “New York Times Closes its Environment Desk, Please, Nobody Laugh” That desk has been the launching pad for “some of the most compelling and moving news stories of the last four years.” Among them:
Every time you take an unnecessary shower a baby polar bear dies.
No, it’s getting hotter. Really, it’s getting hotter. Dr James Hansen says so and he works at NASA.
Just because global warming stopped in 1997 doesn’t mean it’s not going to start again, no sirree – and when it does it will be worse, much, much worse.
Al Gore: why selling my environmental channel Current TV to oil-funded Jew-haters for $100 million was the morally right thing to do.
We shall miss you, New York Times environment desk. You saved us from ManBearPig!
So why did Al Gore accept $100 million for a cable channel that clearly wasn’t worth that? It’s revenue came entirely from the fees that cable companies paid to have it on the air, a number which was going down as they cancelled it. There’s more to it than hypocrisy. This is a channel that had very low value, and had a very low audience. So they were buying some other product. They now have the former Vice President of the United States on their board, and is a consultant for them. But this is a state for which oil revenue is important.
Even Pravda has given up on global warming. Officially.
Filed under: Economy, Environment, Global Warming, Junk Science, Science/Technology | Tags: At Enormous Cost, Investigating the Obvious, James Delingpole
High up in my list of favorite writers is James Delingpole, who blogs at The Telegraph. Acerbic, grumpy, takes-no-prisoners, tolerates no nonsense and great fun, always, to read. He posted the above video with this commentary:
The harmless trace gas carbon dioxide, as any halfway literate scientist knows, is plant food – not a pollutant. That’s why in agricultural greenhouses commercial growers often raise CO2 levels to between 700 ppm (parts per million) and 1,000 ppm – which is more than twice current atmospheric CO2 levels of (approx) 392 ppm. They do this because they know CO2 increases plants’ growth rate while simultaneously reducing the amount of water they require. (H/T Bufo)
So really, you might not unreasonably think, any large-scale experiment to discover what kind of effect increased levels of CO2 has on eucalyptus trees would fall into roughly the same category as:
A large-scale experiment in the sea to discover whether or not water is wet.
A large-scale experiment in the Vatican to discover whether or not the Pope has Catholic tendencies.
A large-scale experiment in the woods of Canada and Alaska to discover whether or not bears defecate in arborial environments.
A large-scale experiment at Christmas to discover whether or not Father Christmas is a big, fat, jolly man with a white beard and a red outfit trimmed with white fur.
A large scale experiment conducted in the evening to ascertain as to whether night follows day.
A large scale experiment with ice-cream left outside on a very hot day to discover….
It seems though that in Julia Gillard’s Australia the thirst for spending large sums of taxpayers money in order to research the blindingly obvious is still strong.