Agrobiologist and scientific researcher Dr. Albrecht Glatzle, author of over 100 scientific papers and two textbooks, has published research that shows “there is no scientific evidence, whatsoever, that domestic livestock could represent a risk for the Earth’s climate” and that the “warming potential of anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions has been exaggerated”.
Australian climate analyst and IPCC reviewer, Dr John McLean has good news for us on the climate front, as we approach Christmas 2018. A must-read, as well as paying the small $8 fee to download his full report containing some 70 errors in current alarmist propaganda.
Solidarity, the Polish labour union that was founded on 17 September 1980 at the Lenin Shipyard under the leadership of Lech Wałęsa has joined representatives of the Heartland Institute, of Chicago, USA, in a statement signed at Katowice expressing opposition to claims by the UN IPCC about "global warming".
An easily watchable video in which Canadian climatologist Dr Timothy Ball debunks the myth that 97% of scientists support claims of man-made global warming.
Editorial in the Manila Times says: "As things stand today, there is clearly no global consensus on a climate catastrophe, or on the way the world should tackle it. We think the UN should sober up. It is its responsibility to review its climate agenda and change the message."
Members of New Zealand's Parliament have been sent Christmas holiday reading aimed at convincing them that current alarmist propaganda about global warming" (aka "climate change") is nothing more than fraud. Apart from presenting arguments, citations and videos to support his case, the author, John Rofe is also a former commercial fraud investigator and compares climate fraud with business fraud. It is highly recommended reading for everyone.
With the latest U.N. IPCC Conference of the Parties (COP 24) having opened in Katowice, Poland, there has been the now customary flurry of scaremongering reports of ever earlier climate-related doom. Professor Larry Bell comments at Newsmax on the 2018 version of "fake news" on climate issues.
David Whitehouse posts at UK's Global Warming Policy Foundation a graph showing a fall in global temperatures in the past three years. He comments: "It is sad to see the WMO descend into ‘Fake News’ territory, but sadder still to see science reporters regurgitating it without any form of analysis or critical thinking."
US climatologist Dr Judith Curry has just issued a report on her analysis of claims about sea level rise. Her main conclusion: "Mean global sea level has risen at a slow creep for more than 150 years; since 1900, global mean sea level has risen about 7-8 inches. The implications of the highest values of projected sea-level rise under future climate change scenarios are profound, with far reaching socioeconomic and environmental implications. However, these projections are regarded as deeply uncertain and the highest of these projections strain credulity."
Professor Larry Bell posts at Newsmax: "The deadly and costly wildfires ravaging California were tragic, and in large measure were caused by humans. They were not, however, traceable to climate change as claimed by the state’s blame-gaming governor."
Canadian climatologist, Dr Timothy Ball posts at 'WattsUpWithThat' how U.N. functionaries created alarm about the extent to which global warming would cause ocean levels to rise and swamp small island states, such as Maldives and Tuvalu, scaremongering that failed to happen.
A report by Rupert Darwall for the Global Warming Policy Foundation says: "While politicians flatter themselves as climate saviours, the costs are borne in worsened business competitiveness and squeezed house- hold budgets that weigh most heavily on the poorest in society. In one regard though, the CCA [Climate Change Act] has succeeded in its aim as a demonstration project. No other serious country will do anything quite so foolish in the name of saving the climate."
"One of the biggest controversies (and misconceptions) about meat production is its contribution to global warming, which reached media prominence following the publication of the 2006 UN report entitled “Livestock’s Long Shadow.” This document made the shocking claim that livestock accounts for 18 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions globally, placing it ahead of the transport sector. Now, call me naive, but I thought the cause of global warming was our predilection for burning fossil fuels. Does it seem likely that farming – an activity that took place for thousands of years before the industrial revolution – is likely to be the problem?". Keir Watson posts at Quillette.
A recent study demonstrates that dairy farming is a more efficient and cheaper method for providing human energy and protein requirements than growing grains or pulses. This contradicts decades of claims that a plant based diet is the only way to feed a burgeoning world population.
Dr John Hunt posts at Heartland: "Climate scientists are not prophets. Those who believe them on faith provide no good service to the pursuit of truth. Those who blame climate change for every storm or forest fire are silly. Equally silly are those who claim that a particularly cold day proves that climate change is a farce."
In ‘The Ethics of Belief’ (1877), William Kingdon Clifford gives three arguments as to why we have a moral obligation to believe responsibly, that is, to believe only what we have sufficient evidence for, and what we have diligently investigated. Clifford's 'law' is especially apposute in the curren...
Emeritus Professor Geoff Duffy writes: "The GHG concentration of the actual atmosphere is 1.028% of the total atmosphere, based on water vapour being 1% (200C, 75% Relative Humidity). The main gases from possible agricultural sources (methane and nitrous oxide) total only 0.02% of all the GHG, or 0.00021% of the total atmosphere......Hence, it can be concluded from all the available evidence that their contribution to any potential change in weather is miniscule".
Professor Tim Ball and Tom Harris write in the "Washington Times": "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate forecasts were wrong from their earliest reports in 1990. They were so inaccurate that they stopped calling them forecasts and made three 'projections': low, medium, and high. Since then, even their 'low' scenario projections were wrong."