RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: 'There Is No Climate Emergency,' Hundreds Of Scientists, - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

'There Is No Climate Emergency,' Hundreds Of Scientists, Engineers Tell U.N. Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Liz 

  • ***-----------***
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 51,582
  • Joined: 28-February 03

  Posted 30 September 2019 - 02:39 PM

'There Is No Climate Emergency,' Hundreds Of Scientists, Engineers Tell U.N.

Climate Intelligence Foundation calls for UN meeting with experts from both sides of debate

The Washington Times
By Valerie Richardson
Sunday, September 29, 2019

Excerpt:

Lost amid the coverage of Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg at last week’s U.N. Global Climate Summit were the 500 international scientists, engineers and other stakeholders sounding a very different message: “There is no climate emergency.”

The European Climate Declaration, spearheaded by the Amsterdam-based Climate Intelligence Foundation [CLINTEL], described the leading climate models as “unfit” and urged UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to pursue a climate policy based on “sound science.”

“Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy,” said the Sept. 23 letter signed by professionals from 23 countries.

Most of the signers hailed from Europe, but there were also scientists from the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South America.

“We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation,” the letter said.

The signers asked Mr. Guterres to place the declaration on the UN’s agenda for the meeting ending Monday—which hasn’t happened—and organize a meeting of scientists “on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020.”

Quote

Letter to UN SecGen @antonioguterres António Guterres from 500 scientists warns “current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy.” https://t.co/INTsVOIlGu

— Dr. Waheed Uddin (@drwaheeduddin) September 28, 2019

The declaration was dismissed by Penn State climatologist Michael E. Mann, who called it “craven and stupid,” as well as the left-of-center [U.K.] Guardian, which said the document “repeats well-worn and long-debunked talking points on climate change that are contradicted by scientific institutions and academies around the world.”

Quote

Have to admit I did a double take when I first glanced at this. Was sure that last signature was “He Who Must Not be Named”.
Then I reflected on the matter and realized how unlikely that is.
Not even Valdemort would sign his name to something so craven and stupid… pic.twitter.com/PPkkwVzNUI

— Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) September 24, 2019

At the same time, the sheer number of prominent signers with scientific and engineering credentials belied the contention that only a handful of fringe researchers and fossil-fuel shills oppose the climate-catastrophe “consensus.”

The U.S. contingent was made up of 45 U.S. professors, engineers and scientists, including MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen; Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom, as well as several signers formerly affiliated with NASA.

The declaration made six points:

· “Nature as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming”

· “Warming is far slower than predicted”

· “Climate policy relies on inadequate models”

· Carbon dioxide is “plant food, the basis of all life on Earth”

· “Global warming has not increased natural disasters”

· “Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities”

*snip*

Full Article
0

#2 User is online   corporal_little 

  • What is your major malfunction....
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,504
  • Joined: 09-January 04

Posted 30 September 2019 - 03:03 PM

Simple question for our global warming supporters on here..... can you point us to a single climate model that has been remotely accurate over the last 20 years? Just one....
0

#3 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 58,733
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 30 September 2019 - 03:11 PM

Quote

The declaration made six points:

· “Nature as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming”

· “Warming is far slower than predicted”

· “Climate policy relies on inadequate models”

· Carbon dioxide is “plant food, the basis of all life on Earth”

· “Global warming has not increased natural disasters”

· “Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities”


Oh is that all?

[/sarcasm]
0

#4 User is offline   Severian 

  • Order of the Seekers for Truth & Penitence
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 14,617
  • Joined: 14-February 04

Posted 30 September 2019 - 03:17 PM

Quote

A Climate Modeller Spills the Beans

Other gross model simplifications include

# Ignorance about large and small-scale ocean dynamics

# A complete lack of meaningful representations of aerosol changes that generate clouds.

# Lack of understanding of drivers of ice-albedo (reflectivity) feedbacks: “Without a reasonably accurate representation, it is impossible to make any meaningful predictions of climate variations and changes in the middle and high latitudes and thus the entire planet.”

# Inability to deal with water vapor elements

# Arbitrary “tunings” (fudges) of key parameters that are not understood

Concerning CO2 changes he says,

I want to point out a simple fact that it is impossible to correctly predict even the sense or direction of a change of a system when the prediction tool lacks and/or grossly distorts important non-linear processes, feedbacks in particular, that are present in the actual system …

… The real or realistically-simulated climate system is far more complex than an absurdly simple system simulated by the toys that have been used for climate predictions to date, and will be insurmountably difficult for those naïve climate researchers who have zero or very limited understanding of geophysical fluid dynamics. I understand geophysical fluid dynamics just a little, but enough to realize that the dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans are absolutely critical facets of the climate system if one hopes to ever make any meaningful prediction of climate variation.

Solar input, absurdly, is modelled as a “never changing quantity”. He says, “It has only been several decades since we acquired an ability to accurately monitor the incoming solar energy. In these several decades only, it has varied by one to two watts per square metre. Is it reasonable to assume that it will not vary any more than that in the next hundred years or longer for forecasting purposes? I would say, No.”



Read the whole thing...
0

#5 User is offline   Noclevermoniker 

  • Wire Dachsies Matter
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,331
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 30 September 2019 - 05:16 PM

Show us your data, Mann.
0

#6 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 5,925
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 30 September 2019 - 07:15 PM

Being a good steward of the environment is no longer enough. We need socialism to save us from this sudden onset extinction level crisis! :tantrum:
0

#7 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,367
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 30 September 2019 - 07:41 PM

+1 scientist to their ranks
0

#8 User is offline   Tikk 

  • Oh Rrrrrreeeaaaally?
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 9,006
  • Joined: 16-December 03

Posted 30 September 2019 - 07:50 PM

View PostHowsithangin, on 30 September 2019 - 07:41 PM, said:

+1 scientist to their ranks



And the fun thing about science is it only takes One scientist.

Despite what climate change proponents think, science is not done by polling scientists.
0

#9 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 58,733
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 30 September 2019 - 10:37 PM

View PostTikk, on 30 September 2019 - 07:50 PM, said:

And the fun thing about science is it only takes One scientist.

Despite what climate change proponents think, science is not done by polling scientists.


Exactly. In any given thousand people, if one is correct and 999 are wrong, that one person isn't any "less" correct because of the numbers who disagree. Science isn't conducted by "popularity contest" methods.

B)
0

#10 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,926
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 30 September 2019 - 11:31 PM

View PostHowsithangin, on 30 September 2019 - 07:41 PM, said:

+1 scientist to their ranks

+1 engineer.
0

#11 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 28,367
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 01 October 2019 - 12:05 AM

View PostTikk, on 30 September 2019 - 07:50 PM, said:

And the fun thing about science is it only takes One scientist.

Despite what climate change proponents think, science is not done by polling scientists.


Exactly.

The scientific method isn't a popularity contest, or an election
0

#12 User is offline   Noclevermoniker 

  • Wire Dachsies Matter
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,331
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 01 October 2019 - 07:27 AM

View Postzurg, on 30 September 2019 - 11:31 PM, said:

+1 engineer.

+1 more engineer.
0

#13 User is offline   Severian 

  • Order of the Seekers for Truth & Penitence
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 14,617
  • Joined: 14-February 04

Posted 01 October 2019 - 07:47 AM

+1 scientist/engineer. Who's actually done some atmospheric modeling in his career.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users