Let’s stop worrying about global warming …and worry about the damage that “green” policies are doing to our economy

image003 (640x640)
That old canard that “97% of scientists support Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)” is cropping up again in social media, parroted cheerfully without critical analysis, so I’ve been drawing attention to my rebuttal on the subject.  This was based on Lord Monckton’s painstaking analysis of the original study on which the 97% claim is based.  It seems that those who produced the 97% figure cheerfully assumed that any paper that failed to deny AGW outright was supporting it.  Far from 97% backing the theory, Monckton showed that less than 3% of the papers cited specifically endorsed it.

Yet the 97% claim keeps coming up, just like the “3½ million jobs at risk if we leave the EU” claim, which is equally fraudulent.

Of course the Warmists are in disarray because all their climate models predicted rising global temperatures based on increasing levels of atmospheric CO2, yet for seventeen years there’s been no further warming.  Here we have the classic scientific method: make a hypothesis (AGW); make predictions based on the hypothesis (the computer models); then test the predictions against the real world.  We’ve done that, and the predictions have failed.  Therefore we have to reject the hypothesis.

 

Rather than reject their cherished mythology, however, they’ve chosen to come up with ingenious ad hoc explanations of why the models appear to be wrong.  Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation has been keeping tabs on these explanations (or as some would describe them, “Just So Stories”) and has counted over 30 so far.

 

The latest idea is that the world is indeed getting hotter, but because of the circulation of ocean currents, the extra heat is hiding away in the deep oceans, and will come out again in a couple of decades to bite our ankles.  You have been warned.  The Warmists don’t seem to have realised that if you need to introduce a new and previously unknown concept to explain the failure of your original models, you are simply admitting that the models themselves were wrong, wrong, wrong.  The need for major post-facto tweaks is an admission of failure.  At the very least, they are admitting that the climate system is far more complicated, and the future trajectory of climate far less certain, than they would have had us believe.  Yet they still want us to mortgage our children and bankrupt our grandchildren on the strength of their predictions.

 

Of course no one disputes that CO2 is a greenhouse gas — if we had none, the world would be frozen.  But its effect is governed by a negative logarithmic relationship — a law of diminishing returns.  From where we are now, further increases have little effect, and anyway man-made emissions are small compared to the natural CO2 cycle (wait for the next Icelandic volcano!).

 

The IPCC gets its alarmist results by assuming an exaggerated climate sensitivity to CO2.  It justifies this by postulating “positive feedbacks”.  But these feedbacks are neither proven nor demonstrated, and many scientists point to negative feedbacks (greater cloud formation and higher albedo, for example) and believe that the balance of feedback effects could be negative.

 

In any case CO2 is just a single factor amongst many that influence a highly complex climate system that is poorly understood (witness the Warmist need it invent Just So Stories when their predictions fail).  Clearly the largest influence on terrestrial climate is the Sun, and well-established, long-term climate cycles are clearly driven by the Sun and other astronomical factors.

 

The slight warming since the late 18th Century is entirely consistent with the long-term cyclical pattern (like the Mediæval Warm Period and the Roman Optimum).  And the historical record clearly shows that CO2 level changes come after temperature changes (since temperature drives the CO2 balance between oceans and atmosphere).  The slight recent warming predates the industrial revolution, and the current increase in CO2 is therefore likely the result, not the cause, of the warming.

 

So let’s stop panicking, and start worrying instead about the damage which “green” policies are doing to our economy.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Let’s stop worrying about global warming …and worry about the damage that “green” policies are doing to our economy

  1. Thomas Fox says:

    How can it be that the UN together with EU were able to progress with present renewable policy when any person of sound mind can read the true and tested climate science to find out that its all been a fake to increase taxation by stealth ?

  2. ian wragg says:

    Your missing the point Roger. When the EU has reduced the motor sizes of hair driers, vavuums etc etc all will be good.
    Haven’t you been keeping up.
    Whilst the rest of the world booms, the EU busts.

  3. Ex-expat Colin says:

    I certainly am worried about DECC policy (energy bills) when its realised the drivers for it arise from Cooke (et al) amongst other observations and most not exactly accurate.:Que calibration of instruments and when measurements were logged/where they came from etc.

    The Cook et al. (2013) 97% paper included psychology studies, marketing papers, and surveys of the general public as scientific endorsement of anthropogenic climate change. And then there were the “raters” of the papers.

    Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males…..?

    http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/cooking-stove-use-housing-associations-white-males-and-the-97

    The worry also is that we have to believe the domain scientists because they are scientists. Well, the splatter of qualifications seem to indicate that? Trouble is that they don’t have a complete (safe) scientific story and the IPCC asserts itself as the authority that summarises their submissions for policy to be made – as if it were a safe story?

    Well, we are learning you know…adjusting our GCM’s to fit observations.

    So whats the temperature threat? About here to here +/- 1deg C or so. When? In the next 30 years or so.

    Apart from being too hot can we get too cold? Maybe, but try not to talk like that.

    Monkton, Lilley, Lawson keep getting abused/ignored because they are not scientists. Common sense and experience/capability sticks out a mile though.

  4. Jane Davies says:

    It wasn’t that long ago the then so called ‘experts’ thought the world was flat!

  5. Richard111 says:

    Oh dear! There is no such thing as ‘a greenhouse gas’!
    99.9% of the Earth’s atmosphere is made up of TRANSPARENT GASES (look it up!), namely nitrogen, oxygen and argon. Once these gases have warmed, by conduction from the surface, THEY CANNOT COOL.
    Gases like water vapour, H2O, and carbon dioxide, CO2, are at their local air temperatures and will radiate and cool the air. Radiation from those gases does reach the surface but the surface is usually warmer than the down welling radiation, (night time. Sunlight will warm) and WILL NOT WARM UP. Go look up the energy potential in each wavelength of radiation.
    It is not ‘greenhouse gases’ I am worried about. I worry about STUPID GOVERMENTS that are forcing policies on the population that will eventually result is massive unrest due to slowly vanishing food supply. The world is cooling. Growing seasons are reducing. Populations are increasing. Bad times are coming.

  6. Brin jenkins says:

    Create a problem, whip it up until someone demands action to save the World, and guess what! New environmental taxation will change it all around. This is true classic Marxism in action to enable control of the masses and destroy private capital.

    On feedback, negative feed back gives increased stability and control. Positive feedback will always runaway and soon be out of control. Think of microphones, amplifiers, and loudspeakers howling with positive feedback. Stabilisers on a ship remove the rolling action with negative feedback.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s