Waves and Tides

Watching Weather Waves, but Missing Climate Tides.

By Viv Forbes, 17 July 2018


The climate alarm media, the bureaucracy and the Green Energy industry follow an agenda which is served by inflating any short-term weather event into a climate calamity. They should take a long-term view.

Earth’s climate is never still – it is always changing, with long-term trends, medium-term reversals and minor oscillations. Humanity is best served by those who use good science to study geology, astronomy and climate history searching for clues to climate drivers and the underlying natural cycles and trends hidden in short-term weather fluctuations.

For the last 10,000 years Earth has basked in the Holocene Interglacial which is the latest of many warm cycles within the Pleistocene Ice Age. There are small warm and cool cycles within the Holocene. Today we enjoy the Modern Warm Cycle (which started about calendar 1900) following the Little Ice Age which bottomed in about 1750.

What does the future hold? The past gives clues to the future.
Continue reading “Waves and Tides”

Paris Accord Based on Fraud

By Brendan Godwin

The Paris Accord is based on fraud. Carbon Dioxide or CO2 is essential for all life on earth. Without it we are all extinct. There is nothing unusual happing with the globe’s temperatures. No unusual warming. Our interglacial warm period peaked 8,000 years ago and we are cooling. We’ve come to the end of this interglacial and are about to enter the next ice age. Humans can do nothing to stop that. The globe has no temperature control knob, it is impossible for humans to control the globe’s temperature. CO2 does not produce warming. There’s not enough of it to do anything. It is warming that produces CO2. It is impossible for the cause to be the effect. CO2 has lagged temperature by 1,000 years for the past 1 mil years and it has never stopped the earth from entering an ice age, even when it was 4,000 ppm. CO2 is the gas of life. We need more not less of it and we should be regulating for more not less emissions. It is needed to grow our food crops.

Paris is based on IPCC reports. The IPCC rely on their GCM models. None of the models rely on past climate history but rather a mathematical theory based on refuted, negated, fake and fraudulent science. They all incorporate:

  • A “human fingerprint” or THS (Tropical Hot Spot) on the earth’s climate that doesn’t exist. IPCC’s AR2 report was fraudulently altered to remove scientific reports that were negative of their GHE definition;
  • Lewis Fry Richardson’s flawed atmospheric model equation;
  • Michael Mann’s fraudulent hockey stick graph in AR3;
  • Arrhenius’ flawed hypothesis of the greenhouse effect; Arrhenius invented heat from nothing.
  • The multiplier effect of water vapor feedback. The flawed CO2 increases water vapor hypothesis based on Arrhenius and the Charney report; From observations, water vapor is decreasing.
  • A corrupted peer review process.

Then back all this up by fraudulently altering the data to support the failed models that can’t even predict the last 30 years of hindsight.

The money wasted on Paris will do absolutely nothing to the globe’s temperatures and is a waste. Paris is economic vandalism disguised as environmentalism. It is the political agenda of the communist movement. A wealth redistribution scheme to get rich countries to give away money to poor countries with the end goal to destroy capitalism.

The problem with Turnbull is that he only listens to one side of the science, the side that suits him. There are 32,000 real scientists in the NIPCC who dissent from the IPCC. Politicians need to listen to the real science, not the fraudulent science. During the last ice age CO2 levels dropped to 180 ppm. Plants don’t grow with CO2 at 150 ppm or less. That’s our food crops. If we lower CO2 will face human extinction. It is the interglacial warm period that is causing CO2 to be released from the oceans. Only 3% of annual emissions are from humans. We need more not less to starve off human extinction in the next ice age that is about to hit us.

 

Brendan Godwin
Weather Observer and General Meteorology
Bureau of Meteorology
Mawson Antarctic 1974

Quit Paris Treaty

Tony Abbott is right – Australia should quit the Paris Climate Treaty.

China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia will ignore Paris. USA has already quit and Japan even withdrew from the Kyoto Treaty. Germany will fail to meet its obligations and Poland will not try very hard. France relies heavily on nuclear power and naturally supports imposing Paris handicaps on competitors.

And most of the rest of the world are just hanging in there hoping for a flood of cash from the climate compensation fund or from selling phony carbon credits.

Australia has huge coal, gas, oil and uranium resources. To export these, while we hobble our industries with windmill power, is insane.

Viv Forbes

The Past is the Key to the Present… and the Future

A Corollary of the Principle of Uniformitarianism

By Howard Dewhirst, Geologist

This document aims to contextualise the scientific debate concerning Climate Change (CC) and Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Examining Earth history, it is indisputable that CC has been operating for many hundreds of millions of years, in cycles that span many different time-scales (millennial-plus to decadal), all without human influence. Understanding the causative factors in past CC provides a solid basis for framing the present debate. AGW is a notion which says that human activities, notably the addition of CO2 to the atmosphere, are causing an increase in the global heat budget. That higher-energy state of Earth’s environment it is argued sets the stage for damaging CC effects. Political and economic decisions have been influenced by this claim. Some of those decisions harm efforts to better the health and welfare of the world’s population, including both the poorest and those who are better off. If the CC and AGW arguments are incorrectly based, as we outline here, there is a need to re-consider those decisions.

CC in Earth History

  • Paleo-temperature (of atmosphere and ocean) is taken as a proxy indicator of climate, since climate is a complex concept that includes precipitation amounts and patterns, wind, etc whose history and future cannot be extracted or classified in a satisfactory way
  • Earth’s equatorial region has had a consistent temperature during the climate swings over hundreds of millions of years, but the polar areas have varied, thus altering the pole-to-equator gradient of heat energy, which is the principal driver of climate on the planet
  • Causes of CC (changes in temperature gradients) are dominated by orbital and solar effects, with added signals from volcanoes (both dust and chemicals), tectonics and plate motions, and biological feedbacks
  • Oceans (which cover ~70% of the planet) are the main heat reservoir, but with patterns of warmer and colder water distributions that reveal decadal and longer cyclicity that is not understood

Global Warming

    • Earth’s temperature has been generally rising since the end of the last ice age, with an apparent acceleration during the last century, but not since
    • Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have also been rising more uniformly, now reaching 410ppm or 0.04% of atmosphere
    • CO2 has been identified as a ‘greenhouse gas’, based on an argument that it traps and reflects heat
    • The physics of CO2 heat retention are over-stated, as only a tiny portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (wavelengths of heat energies) can be captured by this molecule
    • Because CO2 concentration is rising and is implicated in global warming, and because CO2 is a by-product of combustion, energy sources from fossil fuels have been demonised – via social and political suppression of their use, and a push towards 100% renewable energy
    • There are three key challenges to the idea that CO2 is the primary cause of GW:
      • Long-term records of CO2 and temperature show good correlation, but the CO2 concentrations lag behind temperature increases by thousands of years. Thus, CO2 increase is the consequence of rising ocean temperature, not the cause
      • Numerical models of climate systems, which involve simplifying assumptions and methods that are associated with serious artefacts, consistently fail to ‘predict’ the known past temperature patterns. Such models cannot justify the suppression of hydrocarbon fuels.
      • Average temperatures are no longer increasing despite the inexorable rise of CO2

Human activities are not the driver of global warming (or cooling). Earth’s systems are governed by processes that operate over a wide range of time- and length-scales, many of which far exceed the usual scope of human perceptions. The demonization of carbon is scientifically unjustified.

Howard Dewhirst

Read the open letter: http://clexit.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/gsl-open-letter-dewhirst.pdf [PDF, 312 KB]

Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council Press Release

PRESS RELEASE

The Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council in its Comment Calls on President Trump and EPA to Repeal and Not Replace the Clean Power Plan(CPP).
CHECC CPP ANPRM Replacement Comment Overview FINAL 022718 PDF

Key Comment Conclusions*:

  • CO2 is a Beneficial Gas, not a Pollutant. As a result, the Social Cost of Carbon is Negative since CO2 is so very critical to plant growth and therefore human life.

  • The 2009 Endangerment Finding must be reconsidered and rescinded/vacated. Thus, the CPP would not be replaced.

  • All future Federal, State and private sector decisions regarding the Nation’s electric power grid must focus solely on minimizing consumer electricity prices as well as maximizing Grid Reliability and Resilience. No consumer electricity price increases should be permitted by regulators that result from increased Renewables/Energy Storage Grid penetration.

  • The Current Reconsideration of future vehicle MPG Standards must treat CO2 reduction as a cost, not a benefit, so that only consumer preferences matter, not climate change issues. Currently, with low gasoline price expectations, most consumers prefer trucks & SUVs.

*Based on the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC) Comment in response to EPA’s ANPRM CPP Replacement

CHECC CPP ANPRM Replacement Comment FINAL to EPA 022618 (1)

Filed February 26, 2018

Continue reading “Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council Press Release”

The Natural History Museum vs. American Museum of Natural History

The Natural History Museum is accusing the American Museum of Natural History “of being ‘anti-science’ and promoting ‘climate science misinformation’, and in particular, vilifying a scientifically-engaged trustee of the museum, Rebekah Mercer.”

For background on this dispute, see: Background Detail [PDF, 190 KB]

For the petition letter with signatories supporting American Museum of Natural History see: Petition [PDF, 445 KB]

Real Debate Rocks the Geological Society of London

The Geological Society of London helped to drive UK climate policy. However many members of the GSL have questioned their position papers, and a group of disgruntled geo’s resigned after the position papers were published.

There is now a movement to have the GSL position papers amended, and comments and submissions are invited. Read all about it below:

Here is the questionable policy statement:

http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/

And here are some comments to date:

http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36505
http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36507
http://euanmearns.com/the-geological-society-of-londons-statement-on-climate-change/#comment-36511

Please join this important debate.

Greenpeace Always Makes a Disaster out of it

By Daniel Wetzel | As of: 18.12.2017

https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article171696371/Eine-Katastrophe-macht-immer-erst-Greenpeace-draus.html

[This English version authorised by Patrick Moore.]


“Arguably, the former environmental activist Patrick Moore is difficult to overcome” – Source: Martin U. K. Lengemann

Patrick Moore once helped to found Greenpeace. Today, the ecologist considers the organization an unscientific lobby group. He has a provocative message: carbon dioxide is not poison. It is good for life on the planet.

The week was not bad for the climate protection movement. France’s head of state Emmanuel Macron had summoned the Climate Chancellor Angela Merkel to the summit in Paris and or emerged with the rank of European “Climate President”. And his plan worked out: UN Secretary-General António Guterres urged that he no longer supports fossil fuels because this would amount to an “investment in destruction”. The World Bank announced that it would stop promoting oil and gas production from 2019 onwards.

With so much international involvement in the fight against CO2, the Greens in Paris missed senior German officials. Merkel was represented by Barbara Hendricks (SPD). From the perspective of green climate politician Annalena Baerbock, the Federal Minister for the Environment only completed an “unmotivated courtesy visit”.

Baerbock’s indignation would certainly have been even greater if she had known which alternative program numerous members of the Bundestag of the Union (CDU) and the FDP had preferred to the Paris climate summit. They had followed the invitation of the Federal Association “Liberaler Mittelstand” to a parliamentary breakfast.

There, Canadian Patrick Moore, one of the founding fathers of Greenpeace, presented his view on climate change, CO2 emissions and energy policy, which – if true – would undermine the foundations of official energy and climate policies. For years, Moore has been one of the archenemies of the world’s largest environmental organization, which he had once brought to the baptism. For today’s activist generation he is the fallen angel of environmental protection.

Carbon dioxide increase did not increase temperature
Nuclear power, genetically modified food, forest conservation, chemicals use, climate change – in almost every major environmental issue Moore represents a view that directly contradicts the Greenpeace policy. In doing so, Moore studied biology, biochemistry and forestry, a doctorate in ecology, and was for years the only trained scientist in the Greenpeace leadership.

German carbon dioxide emissions are rather low by international standards – Source: Infographic The World

Good argument is difficult to master. His quarrels with Greenpeace often end at a high level at a stalemate, statement against statement. Everyone claims that his view of things is the truth. This is how it was when Moore presented diagrams of global temperatures and CO2 concentrations of the last 500 million years to a parliamentary breakfast of about 30 members of the Bundestag.

In another chart, the curves derived from the ice cores of the Russian Antarctic station Vostok, provided no evidence, according to Moore, that the CO2 content in the atmosphere had raised the temperature. On the contrary, he explained to the perplexed MPs: “The CO2 value follows the change in temperature, not the other way around.”

Moore does not deny that the CO2 concentration has risen sharply since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Nor does he shake the fact of global warming. Only he claims that one has nothing to do with the other. The curves of shark attacks and ice-cream consumption also showed a strong correlation, he reveals. “Correlation does not prove causation.”

The Sun’s activity affects the world climate
According to Moore, there are many complex factors that change the climate. Solar activity is part of it, cloud formation and much more. When the earth’s temperature rises, the oceans “emit” more CO2. A rise in carbon dioxide would be the consequence, not the cause of global warming. The basic assumption of many climate scientists that carbon dioxide is the main trigger of global warming is a “hypothesis” for Moore, nothing more.

“There is no definitive scientific evidence that carbon dioxide is responsible for the slight warming of the global climate that has occurred in the last 300 years – since the Little Ice Age,” says Moore. “Such a proof would have been documented – that’s not the case.”

The objection that 97 percent of all climate scientists attribute CO2 to the role of the greenhouse gas does not impress Moore. He refers to a booklet from 1931. The title: “100 authors against Einstein”. With great numerical superiority, scientists attacked the theory of relativity that a young patent attorney named Albert Einstein had published a few years earlier.

Einstein responded as relaxed as Moore today: “If I was wrong, it would be sufficient for a single author to refute me.” the IPCC of the United Nations, the ultimate judge in matters of climate change, certainly does not impress Moore.

Climate council focuses on human influence
His skepticism derives from the statutes of the IPCC: The committee has the mission to explicitly investigate only the human impact on climate change. For the study of the natural causes of climate change, therefore, the IPCC lacks any mandate. This leads to a conflict of interest: If the UN body finds no human cause of global warming, it loses its right to exist.

In any case, because of its composition, the IPCC does not enjoy the confidence of the former Greenpeace chief. The IPCC was founded by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). According to Moore, “people who care about the weather forecast for the next week” and environmentalists “who focus on daily politics”. That does not indicate competence for the evaluation of the ages of the Earth.

“Why does no one ask geologists, paleontologists, astrophysicists?” After all, the IPCC always expresses only a “concern” about climate change in its progress reports, Moore states. “Greenpeace always makes a disaster out of it”. Since leaving Greenpeace in 1986, Moore repeatedly accuses the environmental organization of unscientific alarmism.


Greenpeace has been attracting attention for decades through spectacular actions. Here activists rappel off the cooling tower of the Neurath coal-fired power plant. The slogan: “CO2 kills” – Source: picture alliance / dpa

When Greenpeace was planning a worldwide campaign against the use of chlorine in the 1980s, Moore’s loyalty ended. Chlorine is the eleventh most common element in the earth’s crust, the most important element for public health in human history, and the raw material for countless medicines.

He does not want to force environmental protection at the expense of people. In the environmental organizations, however, the belief has spread that humans are the enemies of the Earth, which he could not support. Moore withdrew himself after 15 years in the Greenpeace peak body. He first became a salmon farmer and then an independent environmental consultant.

He also accepted positions from the nuclear industry and forestry companies in Asia and North America, but he still does not sacrifice his environmental credentials. Although 70, Moore does not expect his crusade against environmental fear mongering is coming to an end anytime soon.

Without CO2, our earth would have long been a dead planet
It annoys him that CO2, the basic building block of all life on earth, is denounced by climate protectors to school classes as a “poison”. Without the gas, Moore said, “our Earth would be a dead planet.”

In the Bundestag he projected graphs on the wall, showing that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been steadily reduced for 150 million years by natural deposition on the seabed and in the earth’s crust.

In primeval times, the amount of carbon dioxide was ten times higher than today’s levels – at the same time there was an explosion of flora and fauna. “Even today, the plants would like to have more CO2,” says Moore, pointing out that “every professional greenhouse farmer fertilizes his plants with CO2 input.”

Concentration approached dangerously low levels
The real drama is not the warming, but the decay of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. From more than 4600 parts per million (ppm) it had dropped to barely 180 ppm during the last glaciation. “This is only 30 ppm above the level at which plants begin to die,” says Moore. This was only 18,000 years ago, a geological blink of an eye. It is largely due to the burning of fossil fuels by humans, that the CO2 content has increased again to about 400 ppm today.

If man were to support natural CO2 reduction and ban fossil fuels, “life on earth would be over in less than two million years,” claims Moore. “The fact is that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been dropping to a dangerously low level for a very long time”.

“Human combustion of fossil carbon sources helps restore a balance to the global carbon cycle,” says Moore. More carbon dioxide would contribute to more plant growth, more trees and larger food harvests.

Climate goals risk Germany’s prosperity
Germany will miss its climate targets for 2020 – and more drastically than expected. The Federal Environment Ministry has calculated this. Above all, the cause is the increasing fuel consumption in road traffic. Source: N24 / Daniel Franz

Germany is missing its climate goals by miles. From an economic point of view, it is impossible to live up to the promises made by the government for CO2 reduction by 2030. This results from a calculation from the Ministry of Economic Affairs. If the analysis of the former Greenpeace leader is correct, it would undermine the basis of an energy policy that derives its legitimacy from mainstream climate science. A layman may wish for open discussion in the face of such a fundamental dispute. But such a serious discussion is not expected in today’s political climate.

The climate “scientists” had already declared their knowledge before the summit in Paris was completed: The climate debate is finished. A dictum that makes Moore quite certain that “in the best scientific tradition, skepticism is almost mandatory.”

© WorldN24 GmbH. All rights reserved.

Part Time Power

Solar power only works while the sun shines – it is part-time power.

Wind power only works when suitable winds blows – also part-time power.

Batteries only work when charged – part-time power again.

Hydro fails in droughts – more part-time power.

And using full-time power like gas to fill the inevitable supply gaps from part-time power forces backup gas to operate like part-time power.

Moreover, on sunny windy days, wind and solar generators spew out electricity at little extra cost. These erratic surges of part-time power drive short-term electricity prices so low that even low-cost full-time producers like coal cannot operate profitably at those times. They are throttled back and forced to operate as yet another part-time power plant.

24/7 electricity users such as hospitals, trains, factories, refineries, fuel and water pumps, cash registers, infrastructure and mines cannot operate on part-time electricity.

Moreover, every part-time power producer (using sun, wind, batteries, hydro, gas or coal) consumes money full-time for operations, standby, maintenance and replacement. Each also has to fund its own specialised generators, transmission lines, access roads and workforce. Electricity becomes both unreliable and expensive, and consumers suffer.

Using taxes, subsidies, dictates and mandates to replace a full-time power producer like coal with up to five part-time power producers only makes sense in the part-time minds that inhabit Greentopia.

Canberra cannot improve any of this with more laws and regulations – they must REPEAL all the legislation, regulations, subsidies and taxes that created the mess in the first place. State governments too should repeal their silly energy laws, and stop shutting and destroying power stations. More laws and regulations can only make things worse.

To comment on this article visit:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/18/green-power-is-part-time-power/

Viv Forbes
26 Nov 2017

Party Time for Climateers

The climate warriors have held yet another Global Warming Jamboree in Bonn. As expected we were treated to an orchestrated flood of frightening forecasts to support their alarmist agenda.

Naturally most of them did not use carbon energy to get there.

bonn-s

Image credits to www.carbon-sense.com

For 23 years they have maintained these shindigs with no effect on the climate but causing great harm to many ordinary people – soaring costs for unreliable subsidised green electricity, loss of manufacturing and mining jobs, and increased food costs caused by high power prices and using food for ethanol/biodiesel.

Climate alarm is just a cover story. The glittering goal they seek is world government directed by unelected officials and funded by a global carbon tax.

What has kept these unproductive conferences alive for so long?

The money is great, the parties are fun, and the prize is power.

To comment on this article visit:
https://www.iceagenow.info/party-time-climateers/

Further Reading:
An acute case of Apocalypse Fatigue Syndrome by Keith DeLacy:
https://carbon-sense.com/2017/11/17/apocalypse-fatigue-syndrome/

An Avalanche of Global Warming Alarmism:

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/03/an-avalanche-of-global-warming-alarmism-is-about-to-hit/

Here is the First Alarming Salvo:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/03/climate/us-climate-report.html

Climate Policy Is: Redistributing The World’s Wealth:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/18/ipcc-official-%E2%80%9Cclimate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth%E2%80%9D/

What we need to do – Drain the Canberra Swamps like they are doing in Washington:
http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/360763-epas-scott-pruitt-drains-the-swamp-like-no-one-else-in-washington

Viv Forbes
6 Nov 2017