You will need to register if you were an old (2012) MCL user

Just to be clear, while this is, Paris let the old place die, all posts from the original MCL are most likely gone forever

Don't let the fact that your browser remembers your old username and password fool you, but you can, of course, use your old username here, when you register

Climate Change The Scam.

  • You’ve probably seen the latest alarming headlines: Rising sea levels from climate change could flood 187 million people out of their homes. Don’t believe it. That figure is unrealistic—and it isn’t even new. It appears in a new scholarly paper, whose authors plucked it from a paper published in 2011. What the earlier paper actually found was that 187 million could be forced to move in the unlikely event that, in the next 80 years, no one does anything to adapt to dramatic rises in sea level.

    In real life, the 2011 paper explained, humans “adapt proactively,” and “such adaptation can greatly reduce the possible impacts.” That means “the problem of environmental refugees almost disappears.” Realistic assumptions reduce the number to between 41,000 and 305,000—at most, less than 1/600th of the figure in those headlines.

    Sober findings get less attention than alarming and far-fetched speculation. The United Nations’ climate-panel scenarios all show that the world will be far richer and more resilient by the end of the century. That means we’ll be better able to tackle challenges like flooding—as much poorer societies have done for centuries. We have more know-how and technology than ever to build dikes, surge barriers and dams, expand beaches and construct dunes, make ecosystem-based barriers like mangrove buffers, improve building codes and construction techniques, and use land planning and hazard mapping to minimize flooding.

    Journalists looking for alarming headlines get help from climate scientists who gloss over adaptation and from public-relations teams that know their audience. A 2018 paper looked at two scenarios. In the first, sea levels rise almost 3 feet during the next 81 years, yet no one thinks to change the height of a single dike anywhere in the world. That would cost $14 trillion globally a year.

    The authors acknowledge this wouldn’t happen: “It is clear that all coastal nations have, and will continue to adapt by varying degrees to sea level rise.” In the second scenario, they try to account for adaptation, though they assume that as soon as any nation gets as rich as Romania is today, it will freeze its efforts. Even with this odd assumption, estimated flooding costs still fall 88%. The press release announcing the study skipped the second scenario and trumpeted the $14 trillion figure. So did every news story.

    Today, some three million people are flooded annually, costing around $11 billion in flood damages and $13 billion in dike costs, a total of 0.05% of global gross domestic product. In an updated version of that influential 2011 paper, the authors examined what would happen in a more realistic world where people adapt more as they get richer. They found that even in the hottest world, spending an additional 0.003% of GDP on protection would reduce the number of displacements from flooding by two-thirds, while the total cost would fall from 0.05% to 0.008% of global GDP.

    Climate change is real and needs to be addressed, but when we are asked to spend trillions of dollars on policies that would transform the global economy, we need to demand more than hype and spin.

    Mr. Lomborg is the president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and the author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist” and “Cool It.”

    Appeared in the May 31, 2019, print edition as 'Examining The Latest False Alarm On Climate.'

  • ABCzeera fantasies: Climate change has started to influence our language

    Could the ABCzeera be more incompetent? Not only do they deny linguistic history, fail to do basic research, have no data, nor cogent argument, they don’t come up with any new words in common use, and they resort to kindergarten name-calling as if it was “scientific”.

    Here’s a group of paid propaganda workers who have destroyed basic English — now pretending that the distortion of the language was somehow a natural grassroots progression instead of their own sloppy tool to silence debate.

    Climate change has started to influence our language. Here’s how
    by someone called “ABCzeera News Breakfast”

    Climate change isn’t just affecting our planet, it’s also shifting the language we use, as idioms take on new meaning and words are created to express the unique phenomenon.

    Some words have been popularised by musicians and filmmakers, while the rather grandly named Bureau of Linguistic Reality has started crowdsourcing new terms and definitions.

    The Guardianista media outlet also announced this month it was updating its style guide on climate, suggesting “climate sceptic” be swapped for “climate science denier”, and “global warming” for “global heating”.

    Let’s be real, the term “denier” has been in use for 544 years and means essentially the same now as it did then. In 1475, to be a denier meant to reject a religion, and so it is today. If you don’t have faith that solar panels can stop storms you are a denier — a lizard brain robot fool that can’t “see” the light.

    The Guardianista only swapped “climate denier” for “climate science denier” because they looked so stupid when skeptics said (as I have been saying for years) Which person on Earth denies we have a climate? The phrase was literal rank nonsense with no practical definition in English or science. But who cares? Is language a tool to communicate via accurate shared defined meanings or a self-serving tool to confuse and fool?

    As for “global warming” becoming “global heating” — this is just the usual progression of propaganda terms. Once a phrase becomes a joke cliche, it’s time to invent a new phrase. On a cold day the masses now say “we could use some global warming”. No shock value left for agitprop, so bring in “global heating”.

    This is mere projection of their Christmas wish list
    Who needs evidence, when you can just make up a fantasy:

    “There are a lot of words and phrases that are coming into English that are becoming part of the new dialect,” crossword creator and self-confessed word nerd David Astle said.

    “It’s looking at the fact this is a changing world, so what are the words we need?”

    Let’s talk “facts”. So what exactly are the “lots” of “new words” the ABC is talking about — There’s Cli-fi, a term that almost no normal person uses. Plus solastalgia, both of which are not included in the top 86,800 words in the English language. So about 0.0001% of the population uses these words and they both work at the ABC.

    Other words include “Greenwashing”, envirocrime, ecocide, “Green economy” and “closed loop”?

    How about some terms the ABCzeera missed:
    Like ClimateGate, Green Tape, Green Greed, The Green Blob, junk science, carbonista‘s, EcoWorriers, the Adjustoscene and the Gore Phenomena. How about “children won’t know what science is”.

    The Urban Dictionary has a couple of others:

    Mannian: “The act of declaring an event or occurrence as unprecedented without having examined the necessary evidence to substantiate the claim.

    Or Cli-mate: A combination of the words climate and primate to signify the primitive (primate like) views of the world climate situation. Instead of thinking for themselves, doing research or even investigating both sides of the story, these Cli-mates follow the new religion of environmentalism blindly based on falsified data from Climategate. Sadly, you cannot debate with Cli-mates about the issue despite various climate experts testifying that there is no “global warming”.

    What’s evidence? Whatever you want.
    Which genius linguists or data sources did the ABCzeera “interview”? Their own pet activists, and data — what’s that?

    The ABCzeera quotes “word nerd” David Astle who writes crosswords, and the The Bureau of Linguistical Reality (BLR). Apparently the latter is worthy of a subheader and half a page of descriptors. The BLR is a website set up by two women who got funding from the bizarrely named: “Invoking the Pause” which partners with, and pretty much the entire Green Blob. BLR is so popular most posts still have zero comments. Hey, but it’s only been running five years. I think some skeptics should pop in and help them get started.

  • Climate zombies are on the march all over the world from Warringah to Washington DC and London where they threaten to close Heathrow when the holidays start. But in the adult world the climate is becoming chilly for alarmism. This collation of news from the Global Warming Policy Forum indicates that realism is biting, especially in Europe where various Green parties have driven suicidal climate policies for decades.

    1. After Election Drubbing, Massive Opposition To Coal Exit In Ruling CDU Party
      Die Tagesschau, 31 May 2019

    2. Cold Feet: Germany’s ‘Climate Cabinet’ Delays Action Again
      Deutsche Welle, 30 May 2019

    3. After Election Defeat, Queensland’s Labor Government Paves Way For Huge New Coal Mine
      Australian Associated Press, 31 May 2019

    4. Green Dole: Renewable Energy Jobs Plunge By A Third
      The Guardian, 30 May 2019

    5. Climate Activists Threaten Holiday Chaos As They Vow To Shut Down Heathrow Airport
      Daily Mail, 31 May 2019

    6. Scotland Yard To Charge 1,100 Climate Rebels For London Shut-Down
      Evening Standard, 25 May 2019

    7. Will Climate Hysteria Cost U.S. Democrats The Next Elections?
      David Harsanyi, The Federalist, 30 May 2019

    8. And Finally: What if Green Energy Isn’t the Future?
      Mark P Mills, The Wall Street Journal, 20 May 2019

    See Alan Moran’s Climate News for June. Packed with information and graphic illustrations.

  • The world grain harvest is heading for a record yield although some Australian farmers are doing it tough.

    AS NORTHERN hemisphere crops near the start of their harvest in late May and June, the USDA’s latest World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) have generated a global wheat production forecast of a record 777 million tonnes (Mt) – 46Mt greater than the previous year – which will recharge coffers depleted by last year’s smaller crops.

    The greatest turnaround in wheat production forecasts in 2019-20 among major exporters will occur in the EU, where a 17Mt increase is forecast, and Australia, Canada, Russia and Ukraine are all expected to harvest 3-5Mt more wheat this year than in 2018-19.

    USDA forecasts Australia’s new-crop wheat production at 22.5Mt, up from 17.3Mt in the 2018-19 marketing year.

    The increase in production will lead in 2019-20 to higher trade, consumption and stocks, all of which were cut in 2018-19 by below-trend world crops, moves which drove prices higher over most of the marketing year.

  • Supernova caused lightning, which caused fires, which (maybe) caused humans to stand upright

    ....Back in the unpoliticized Pliocene it’s possible that cosmic rays bombarded Earth and triggered lightning which started fires all around the Earth. This may (warning: speculation) have pushed human ancestors to stand on two legs. In the politicized Holocene, however cosmic rays are “irrelevant”. Ancient cosmic rays can set the Earth on fire apparently, change dominant species, and leave a charcoal layer around the Earth. But changes in cosmic rays lately can not cause any changes in modern lightning and cloud cover.

    Color me skeptical that there is a cause and effect link between fires and homo-four-legs becoming homo-two-legs. It’s possible, and interesting, but a little bit “just so”. There are many advantages in standing upright — seeing further, reaching higher, standing in water, and carrying booty or babies. Some dinosaurs also evolved to be bipedal.

    The study reminds us that for most of human history Space Weather was important. It’s only modern climate models that decree astronomical-stuff = zero.

    Another previous study showed that lightning strikes occur in time with the spinning Sun in 150 year old Japanese farm records.
    Did ancient supernovae prompt human ancestors to walk upright?

    Supernovae bombarded Earth with cosmic energy starting as many as 8 million years ago, with a peak some 2.6 million years ago, initiating an avalanche of electrons in the lower atmosphere…

    The authors believe atmospheric ionization probably triggered an enormous upsurge in cloud-to-ground lightning strikes that ignited forest fires around the globe. These infernos could be one reason ancestors of Homo sapiens developed bipedalism — to adapt in savannas that replaced torched forests in northeast Africa.

    “It is thought there was already some tendency for hominins to walk on two legs, even before this event,” said lead author Adrian Melott, professor emeritus of physics & astronomy at the University of Kansas. “But they were mainly adapted for climbing around in trees. After this conversion to savanna, they would much more often have to walk from one tree to another across the grassland, and so they become better at walking upright. They could see over the tops of grass and watch for predators. It’s thought this conversion to savanna contributed to bipedalism as it became more and more dominant in human ancestors.”

    Based on a “telltale” layer of iron-60 deposits lining the world’s sea beds, astronomers have high confidence supernovae exploded in Earth’s immediate cosmic neighborhood — between 100 and only 50 parsecs (163 light years) away — during the transition from the Pliocene Epoch to the Ice Age.

    “We calculated the ionization of the atmosphere from cosmic rays which would come from a supernova about as far away as the iron-60 deposits indicate,” Melott said. “It appears that this was the closest one in a much longer series. We contend it would increase the ionization of the lower atmosphere by 50-fold. Usually, you don’t get lower-atmosphere ionization because cosmic rays don’t penetrate that far, but the more energetic ones from supernovae come right down to the surface — so there would be a lot of electrons being knocked out of the atmosphere.”

    According to Melott and co-author Brian Thomas of Washburn University, ionization in the lower atmosphere meant an abundance of electrons would form more pathways for lightning strikes.

    “The bottom mile or so of atmosphere gets affected in ways it normally never does,” Melott said. “When high-energy cosmic rays hit atoms and molecules in the atmosphere, they knock electrons out of them — so these electrons are running around loose instead of bound to atoms. Ordinarily, in the lightning process, there’s a buildup of voltage between clouds or the clouds and the ground — but current can’t flow because not enough electrons are around to carry it. So, it has to build up high voltage before electrons start moving. Once they’re moving, electrons knock more electrons out of more atoms, and it builds to a lightning bolt. But with this ionization, that process can get started a lot more easily, so there would be a lot more lightning bolts.”

    The KU researcher said the probability that this lightning spike touched off a worldwide upsurge in wildfires is supported by the discovery of carbon deposits found in soils that correspond with the timing of the cosmic-ray bombardment.

    “The observation is that there’s a lot more charcoal and soot in the world starting a few million years ago,” Melott said. “It’s all over the place, and nobody has any explanation for why it would have happened all over the world in different climate zones. This could be an explanation. That increase in fires is thought to have stimulated the transition from woodland to savanna in a lot of places — where you had forests, now you had mostly open grassland with shrubby things here and there. That’s thought to be related to human evolution in northeast Africa. Specifically, in the Great Rift Valley where you get all these hominin fossils.”

  • @Lizard-King said in Climate Change The Scam.:

    But changes in cosmic rays lately can not cause any changes in modern lightning and cloud cover.

    Err...? Says who?

  • New finding: Phytoplankton are much bigger players in CO2 levels than realized
    Mysterious CO2 activity in New Zealand shows Phytoplankton at work
    Tom Quirk both finds a mystery and solves it.

    Emiliania huxleyi coccolithophore, phytoplankton.
    Emiliania huxleyi coccolithophore | Alison Taylor.

    Carbon dioxide is a “well mixed gas” yet CO2 levels over New Zealand start rising there each year in March — a whole month before we see it CO2 start to rise over Tasmania. Air over Cape Grim in Tasmania will be blown by the prevailing wind over to New Zealand about five days later. So these two stations should be showing similar numbers throughout the year. Instead some process in NZ is pushing up CO2 early. Levels also peak earlier in New Zealand, and by September, in early spring, some process around NZ is pulling the CO2 out of the sky. Both NZ and Tasmania share large forested areas, so that wouldn’t explain the difference.

    Quirk wondered if it had something do with phytoplankton, so he searched for satellite data that measures chlorophyll in the ocean and shows, voila, that there is major activity right around the Baring Head station at the same time as CO2 levels are falling. Indeed, the station is smack in the middle of a mass phytoplankton bloom.

    He calculates that each year about one quarter of a ppm is removed by phytoplankton around Baring Head in NZ. Put into context, the total rise of CO2 each year is around six times that in NZ which makes the effect of plankton seem modest — but the bloom in NZ is but a tiny part of the global rises and falls of phytoplankton all around the world. So the most important question remains unanswered — just how much of the yearly rise and fall of CO2 globally is driven by plankton?

    Previously Quirk found a huge 2.5Gt carbon spike in 1990 (which is 9Gt of CO2) — as if three extra China’s were suddenly emitting CO2 that year. The best explanation was that changes in wind patterns and ocean currents meant it was a bad year for phytoplankton. When phytoplankton struggle, they don’t draw down the usual CO2, hence the spike.

    Another study (Martiny, 2013) found that phytoplankton might be drawing up twice as much carbon as modelers thought. While Guidi et al 2015 looked at viruses and discovered that only 10 out of 5,000 were predictive of CO2 levels and these were viruses that infected plankton.

    Humans put out only 4% of global CO2, so in terms of whether humans can outcompete cyanobacteria et al, the answer appears to be “no”.

  • Aussie Government Report: Green Energy Incentives are Failing to Keep the Lights On

    An Australian Government AEMO commissioned report has suggested that while government incentives make renewables preferable to coal, the new renewable capacity isn’t helping grid stability.

    One of their recommendations; more government incentives, to encourage renewable businesses to add battery backup to their solar and wind farms.

    National Electricity Market lacks ‘holistic thinking’ and risks ‘failing to keep the lights on’

    However, the report has identified the new battleground as “anytime/anywhere energy”, or wind and solar, versus “keeping the lights on services”, or traditional synchronised generation from the big fossil fuel utilities.

    The declining cost of wind and solar farms has made them the default choices for additional capacity, however the new generation is seldom integrated with “keeping the lights on services”.

    “We have structured market incentives in such a way that it promotes this increasing divergence. A rapidly increasing number of commercial businesses have ‘followed the money’ to what was disproportionate value due to scheme design,” the report said.

    “There is a glimmer of hope there with people putting in batteries, but it still just a ‘toe-in-the-water’ exercise,” Global-Roam’s Paul McArdle said.

    “It make sense wind and solar farms should invest in some form of battery storage, but there is still a fair bit of commercial risk without greater incentives [to build them],” he said.

    Changes in ‘bid patterns’ for power are seeing an increasing volatility and a concentration of either extremely low (below $0/MWh) or high (above $300/MWh) prices.

    Occasionally “cheap” power may sound good for consumers, but they are bids from price-takers who find it either cheaper to keep plants going, or are happy enough to take whatever price is going — but average prices across the curve keep creeping up.

    Read more:
    A paywalled copy of the report is available here.

    Many Australians hailed the recent electoral victory of the Conservative Morrison government as a victory over the wild green socialism of their political opponents, but I see the Morrison win as a very qualified victory for affordable energy.

    Despite years of Conservative dominance of Australian federal politics, a deluge of cash is still flowing into the pockets of green energy rent seekers.

    Green energy optimists tout an expensive Morrison government scheme to massively increase hydro capacity as the solution to renewable intermittency. But hydroelectricity in a dry country like Australia is not entirely reliable; the catchment where the grand new hydro scheme will be based suffered a severe drought in recent years, which placed substantial pressure on water users.

    Squeezed between these expensive new hydro schemes and calls for new renewable energy incentives are Aussie businesses and voters, who are becoming increasingly impatient with watching “average prices across the curve keep creeping up”.

  • The US just had the wettest winter on record, and another record snow year. This video shows the massive disconnect between climate scientists and reality in their claims about snow.

    Youtube Video

  • @Lizard-King said in Climate Change The Scam.:

    Green energy optimists tout an expensive Morrison government scheme to massively increase hydro capacity as the solution to renewable intermittency. But hydroelectricity in a dry country like Australia is not entirely reliable; the catchment where the grand new hydro scheme will be based suffered a severe drought in recent years, which placed substantial pressure on water users.

    Closed Circuit, Pumped Hydro systems. They're being privately built and some are coming online now. Australia has enough potential pumped hydro locations to supply the entire world's current needs.

    The employment needs to construct enough of them would keep any miner occupied.

    Keep your head well and truly up your sandy arse old timer, the world will be a slightly better place when your gone Alan.., Andrew.. whoever you are.
    Clive? is that you? Or the guy that gave lifesavers a bad name?

  • UN Report from 1989 said that whole continents would disappear by the year 2000.

    Whole continents will disappear, how's that going?

    Big fat zero.

  • @Lizard-King said in Climate Change The Scam.:

    The US just had the wettest winter on record, and another record snow year.

    Climate changing doesn't mean you won't get extremes, it means you will get more extremes you fucking numpty.
    You're currently supporting my reasoning.

  • @Lizard-King said in Climate Change The Scam.:

    UN Report from 1989 said that whole continents would disappear by the year 2000.

    Whole continents will disappear, how's that going?

    Big fat zero.

    Well duh. I'm not saying whole continents will disappear.
    It is though fact that the ocean is rising. this is a measured thing, not just a hypothesis.

  • @Snark said in Climate Change The Scam.:

    It is though fact that the ocean is rising.

    UN Globalist/IPCC lies.

    UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level

    STOCKHOLM, Sweden — The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) is misleading humanity about climate change and sea levels, a leading expert on sea levels who served on the UN IPCC told The New American. In fact, it is more likely that sea levels will decline, not rise, explained Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, the retired head of the paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University. A new solar-driven cooling period is not far off, he said. But when Mörner tried to warn the UN IPCC that it was publishing false information that would inevitably be discredited, they simply ignored him. And so, dismayed, he resigned in disgust and decided to blow the whistle.

    Asked if coastal cities such as Miami would be flooding due to sea-level rise caused by alleged man-made global warming, Mörner was unequivocal: “Absolutely not.” “There is no rapid sea-level rise going on today, and there will not be,” he said, citing observable data. “On the contrary, if anything happens, the sea will go down a little.” The widely respected scientist, who has been tracking sea levels in various parts of the globe for some 50 years, blasted those who use incorrect “correction factors” in their data to make it appear that seas are rising worldwide. That is just wrong, he said.

    Indeed, even speaking of something called “global sea level” is highly misleading, the expert explained. “It is different in different parts of the world,” Mörner said, noting that sea levels can rise in one part of the world and decline in another depending on a variety of factors. For instance, the interview took place right next to an 18th-century Baltic sea-level marker in Saltsjöbaden near Stockholm that showed the Baltic sea level at the time it was made. Because the ground is rising, the marking is now higher up from sea level than it was when it was made. Mörner has personally been measuring and tracking sea levels in equatorial regions of the world — Bangladesh, the Maldives, Southern India, New Caledonia, Fiji, and beyond.

    Mörner's conclusion is that solar activity and its effects on the globe have been the “dominant factor” in what happens to both the climate and the seas. Meanwhile, the UN claims the current changes in climate and sea level are attributable to human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). Man’s emissions of this essential gas, required by plants and exhaled by people, makes up a fraction of one percent of all so-called greenhouse gases present naturally in the atmosphere. “Absolutely not,” Mörner said about the CO2 argument, noting there was “something basically sick” in the blame-CO2 hypothesis. “CO2, if it has any effect, it is minute — it does not matter. What has a big effect is the sun.”

    Obviously, while he was serving on the UN IPCC, Mörner tried to warn his colleagues on the UN body that the politically backed hypothesis about CO2 driving temperature changes, and the subsequent claims regarding dangerous sea-level rise, were totally incorrect. “They just ignored what I was saying,” he recounted. “If they were clever — if they had facts on their hands — they could show that, 'no, you're wrong.' But that is not the case. They just will not discuss it. I will try to discuss it. I will show with their own data that they are wrong. Because in science, we discuss. We don't forbid or neglect.”

    When asked about the frequently repeated (and easily debunked) claims of an alleged 97-percent consensus supporting the man-made global-warming hypothesis, Mörner said it was simply not true — and even if it were, it would be irrelevant. “Why does anybody say something when it is not correct?” he asked. “They say it because they have applied excellent lobbyists. They are working with lobbyists in their hand; 'say this, do that.' We don't do that.” In the field of physics, Mörner estimated that 80 to 90 percent of physicists know the hypothesis is wrong. And among geologists and astronomers, he said probably 80 percent know it is wrong.

    “They claim that there are 97 percent who are for it,” Mörner said. “I claim that it is 97 percent of scientific facts against them.”

    Youtube Video

  • Nothing like mixing a bit of truth with a bit of downright outrageous lies.

    yes, there is certainly potential for the sea levels to drop considerably. There is definitely potential for the plane to pretty much plummet into an ice age, should the ocean current system change:
    This is one of the potential results of climate change.

  • Of all the people that doubt the science of climate change, geologists seem to be the most vocal. But they, of all people, should be the most concerned.

    I was headed to the Sydney ABC studio to talk about my new book on climate change denial. What was unique about this interview was my coauthor Haydn Washington and I would have the opportunity to answer questions from callers. Considering the topic at hand, we expected some demanding questions from those who doubt the climate science. On the way, I declared to Haydn I'd put money on someone bringing up past climate change. In every interview over the weeks following the launch of our book Climate Change Denial, the same question always arose: "Climate has changed naturally in the past so how do we know current climate change is caused by humans?"

    Haydn wisely didn't accept the wager. And sure enough, the first caller (listen) introduced himself as a geologist and proceeded to discuss past climate change. Afterwards, I reflected on geologists and the perception that they tend to be sceptical about human-caused global warming. Australia's most well known skeptic, Ian Plimer, is a geologist, as is another well known sceptic Bob Carter. But is the characterisation that geologists are mostly sceptics accurate?

    One survey of earth scientists found that while 97 per cent of actively publishing climate scientists agree humans are changing global temperatures, only 47 per cent of economic geologists (those who study geology with a view to its commerical exploitation) concur (pdf). In fact, among all earth scientists, economic geologists are the most sceptical.

    Similarly, in response to the consensus on global warming, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists "respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data". You'd call that type of endorsement damning with faint praise.

    However, the broader community of geologists seems convinced by the evidence that humans are causing global warming. The European Federation of Geologists says climate change is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and poses significant risks to human civilisation. The Geological Society of America concurs that "greenhouse gases have been an increasingly important contributor [to global warming] since the mid-1800s and the major factor since the mid-1900s". The Geological Society of London states that "evidence from the geological record is consistent with the physics that shows that adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms the world and may lead to: higher sea levels and flooding of low-lying coasts; greatly changed patterns of rainfall; increased acidity of the oceans; and decreased oxygen levels in seawater".

    So climate scepticism seems strongest among geologists closely linked to the mining and fossil fuel industries. Perhaps the words of Upton Sinclair shine some understanding on the forces at play here: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

    Regardless of motive, the question of past climate change is certainly an important one that provides much insight into how our climate behaves. Plimer's conceit is that as a geologist, he has taken into account Earth's past while climate scientists have ignored it. This is a curious position considering there is an entire field of climate science, paleoclimatology, that examines past climate change. What do they find?

    Climate has changed in the past. Sometimes it changes quite dramatically. Why? When something causes a change in global temperature, such as varying solar activity or changes in the Earth's orbit, feedbacks amplify these changes. The atmosphere grows more humid and as water vapour is a greenhouse gas, this traps more heat. Arctic sea ice melts, causing the exposed ocean to absorb more heat. The feedbacks aren't so large that they lead to runaway warming but they are enough to amplify one degree of greenhouse warming to three degrees of total warming. Many different periods throughout Earth's history, from the last few millennia to millions of years ago, yield remarkably consistent results establishing this amount of climate feedback.

    When geologists bring up past climate change, they're actually citing evidence for climate feedback. Dramatic swings in global temperature, dragging the planet in and out of ice ages, are possible because of these feedbacks. Renowned paleoclimatologist Wally Broecker sums it up beautifully: "The paleoclimate record shouts out to us that, far from being self-stabilising, the Earth's climate system is an ornery beast which overreacts to even small nudges."

    We have already given our climate a big nudge. How do we know it's us causing the warming and not natural causes? Because we've directly measured it. Satellites measure reductions in heat escaping to space - direct empirical evidence that carbon emissions are trapping heat. Surface measurements measure more heat returning to Earth, confirming the increased greenhouse effect. We see many signatures of greenhouse warming such as winters warming faster than summers, cooling upper atmosphere with warming lower atmosphere and nights warming faster than days. The case for human-caused warming is based on many independent lines of evidence.

    The feedbacks that amplified past climate change are now amplifying the warming caused by our carbon emissions. We're measuring more water vapour in the atmosphere, a strong feedback. Arctic sea ice is disappearing and satellites measure less sunlight reflected back to space - another significant feedback. The Earth's past and modern measurements all paint a consistent picture - our climate is already overreacting to our "nudge".

    The peer-reviewed literature on past climate change sends a strong message, in stark contrast to what we hear from petroleum geologists. Past climate change is not a source of comfort. It's a cause for concern.

    Oh look! a source!

  • The only lies are those perpetrated by the UN Jacobin Globalists and their lickspittle climate scientist cadre.

  • The biggest liar on the Planet ManBearPig

    Al Gore Tells Harvard Students ‘Assault On Science’ Threatens Humanity’s Survival

    Former Vice President Al Gore said President Donald Trump’s “assault on science” threatens “the capacity of the human species to endure” on Earth.

    Gore issued his warning in a speech to Harvard University students and faculty Wednesday, stressing “reason” and “rational debate,” indeed democracy itself, were under threat from the “ideology of authoritarianism.”

    Science “is now being slandered as a conspiracy based on a hoax,” Gore said, likely referring to a 2012 Trump tweet where he called man-made global warming a “Chinese hoax.”

    “The subordination of the best scientific evidence to the cynical greed of those buttressing the power of a would-be-autocrat is yet another strategy for controlling policy by distorting and suppressing the best available information,” Gore said.

    “So the ideology of authoritarianism is not only a threat to democracy in America, now because of the attacks on climate science, it has become a threat to the survival of human civilization as we know it and even potentially to the capacity of the human species to endure,” Gore continued.

    “In order to solve the climate crisis, we must solve the democracy crisis,” Gore said.

    While Gore, a Harvard alumni and producer of two films of questionable accuracy on global warming, did not refer to Trump by name, the former vice president’s message was clear.

    “The system of checks and balances that has protected the integrity of our American system for more than two centuries has already been dangerously eroded,” Gore said.

    Gore, however, also went after social media, which he claimed is driven by “surveillance capitalism.” Gore said social media “enhances cynicism and magnifies divisions” that erode society. (RELATED: Supreme Court Asked To Hear Case Involving Leaked ‘Climategate’ Emails)

    Former U.S. VP Gore at Nobel Peace Prize Forum in Oslo
    Former U.S. Vice President and 2007 Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore speaks this year’s Nobel Peace Prize Forum, in Oslo, Norway December 11, 2018. NTB Scanpix/Heiko Junge via REUTERS.

    Gore went on to blame rampant flooding and tornado sightings in the Midwest on man-made global warming, echoing recent attempts by Democratic presidential candidates to do the same in Iowa.

    “Speaking of wind, the winds are increasingly destructive in our world,” Gore said. “Yesterday was the thirteenth day in a row when multiple tornadoes touched down in the United States — 500 this month.”

    “Hurricanes have become much stronger. Today, the Arkansas River is four feet higher than the all-time record flood stage. The Mississippi River is setting records as the longest flood ever. Thirty-nine million Americans today are at risk from flooding,” Gore said.

    Gore also implored Harvard to divest its endowment from fossil fuel holdings, comparing it to the 1980s campaigns to pull investments in South Africa during apartheid. Gore has often compared climate activism to the anti-apartheid, civil rights and abolition movements.

    “It was immoral to continue investing in apartheid,” Gore said before going on to accuse fossil fuel companies of using the tobacco industry’s strategy to keep the American public ignorant of climate science — a narrative pushed by some liberal media outlets.

    “The American people have been the targets of a massive, well-organized and lavishly-funded campaign of disinformation, designed to spread doubt and confusion and prevent the formation of a political consensus necessary to adopt new policies to save the future of human civilization,” Gore said.

    The Gore Effect the meteorological phenomenon whereby temperatures plummet whenever ManBearPig turns up and begins jabbering about global warming

    Total fucking hypocrite, flies all around the world in his personal jet.

  • The Power Of Islam to tackle climate change

    Total and utter horseshit.

    LONDON – Europe’s first green mosque is hoping to harness the power of Islam to tackle climate change, urging Muslims who worship in the British newbuild to do more to protect the planet.

    As one of the fastest growing faiths in the world, Islam could be a powerful force if Muslims were stirred to environmental action, climate activists say.

    Which is where Cambridge Central Mosque steps in.

    Located in the world-famous British university city, the mosque opened its doors in May just in time for the fasting month of Ramadan. It is adorned with latticed columns, clad in solar panels and surrounded by crab apples, with space for 1,000 and a mission to become a force for climate good.

    “The mosque symbolises the spiritual heart of the Muslim community, it’s the central locus where the worshipper connects to God,” said mosque trust patron and musician Cat Stevens.

    Stevens, famous for hit songs “Wild World” and “Morning Has Broken”, became Muslim in the 1970s and is now known as Yusuf Islam. He told the Thomson Reuters Foundation that Muslims had an important role to play in tackling the climate crisis.

    “It (the mosque) is part of the re-education process, digging deeper into the true nature of Islam to reveal its harmony with the balance of the universe,” said Stevens.

    “Many Muslims have forgotten this and are not contributing enough to the present climate crisis.”

    The 24-million-pound ($30-million) building, funded largely by the Turkish government, will welcome hundreds of worshippers for night prayers every night, during this month of Ramadan – following a 18-hour fast from food and drink in daylight hours.

    With recycled rainwater to irrigate the gardens and energy-harvesting heat pumps, the mosque says it produces close to zero carbon emissions and boasts better green credentials than the thousands of other mosques that are scattered across Europe.

    “The Koran emphasises the beauty and harmony of the natural world as a sign of God’s creative power and wisdom,” said mosque trust chairman and Cambridge University professor, Timothy Winter, also known as Abdal Hakim Murad.

    “The struggle against climate change and the mass extinction of species is not only a practical question of human survival, but is a battle to respect and protect God’s gifts.”


    Large skylights illuminate the main prayer hall so no artificial lights are needed by day, while the rooftop is dressed in panels that turn sun to power.

    It is not just the building that is green.

    The mosque follows broad Islamic principles that favour environmental protection, say Muslim climate experts, be it the stewardship of God’s earth or sacred teachings on preserving water, planting trees and protecting animals.

    “Muslims could be a powerful force that can be mobilised against climate change,” said Shanza Ali, co-founder of Muslim Climate Action, a British advocacy group.

    “However this would require us to go back to Islamic teachings and back to valuing the skills, ideas and respect that communities would give the environment,” she said.

    For Ali, a fixed eco-message would not work for the world’s diverse 1.8 billion Muslims; a pluralistic approach could better “revive the connection” between Islam and the environment.

    “Projects like the Cambridge mosque are going to be critical in raising awareness and showing people that this isn’t just a niche issue that some Muslims have picked up, but it’s an issue at the heart of our belief,” she said.

    In 2015, Islamic faith leaders came together to urge Muslims to play a more active role in combating climate change in a declaration that was welcomed by the United Nations.

    The declaration lamented the “corruption” that humans had caused and called for lower emissions, an end to deforestation and greater commitment to renewable energy sources.

    Religious leaders from Pope Francis to the Dali Lama have preached similar eco-messages, warning their faithful of the dangers of growing climate change.

    According to the Alliance of Religions and Conservation charity, the world’s big faiths could galvanise some 5 billion people into climate action, 85% of the world’s population.

    In Britain, former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams – representing some 85 million Christians globally – endorsed Green Party political candidates ahead of Thursday’s European elections, saying it was “harder and harder to pretend that we’re not living in the middle of the most serious environmental crisis in recorded history.”

Log in to reply