Global warming officially dead?
SUNDAY NOVEMBER 20, 2011
Natural Variability To Dominate Weather Events Over Coming 20-30 Years
GWPF Press Release
"London: For many decades to come, and probably longer, mankind’s influence on the frequency of extreme weather events will be insignificant. According to a preliminary report released by the IPCC, there will be no detectable influence of mankind’s influence on the Earth’s weather systems for at least thirty years, and possibly not until the end of this century. The Summary for Policymakers of the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, is in stark contrast to other statements made by the IPCC. It shows that mankind’s influence on the weather is far smaller than natural factors. If and when mankind’s influence becomes apparent it may be just as likely to reduce the number of extreme weather events as increase them. Surveying the state of scientific knowledge IPCC scientists say they cannot determine if mankind’s influence will result in more, or fewer, extreme weather events over the next thirty years or more.
The IPCC report says:
“Projected changes in climate extremes under different emissions scenarios generally do not strongly diverge in the coming two to three decades, but these signals are relatively small compared to natural climate variability over this time frame. Even the sign of projected changes in some climate extremes over this time frame is uncertain”
“This shows the depth of our ignorance of this subject,” says Dr David Whitehouse, science editor of the GWPF. “Whilst it is always important to think about the future in the light of changes we observe to the Earth’s climate, in trying to draw conclusions so far ahead based on what we know, the IPCC scientists are speculating far beyond any reasonable scientific justification.”
Even making the questionable assumption that our computer models are good enough to predict what will happen in the future, for projected changes by the end of the 21st century, the uncertainties in those computer models, and the range of natural climatic variability, are far larger than any predicted human-influenced effects. Extreme weather events have always been with us, and will continue to be so. It is the international community’s responsibility to make those likely to be subjected to them become more resilient."
Contact: Dr David Whitehouse firstname.lastname@example.org
This suggests many things for NZ and out trading partners:
The ETS is now irrelevant, as you cannot tax nature. So are carbon taxes, carbon trading schemes, the Kyoto Protocol and the Copenhagen Accord. The 5-day meetings for politicians in exotic resorts like Rio and Copenhagen, flying first and business class, purportedly to discuss the "crisis" facing mankind, are now clearly superfluous, pointless and unecessary wastes of taxpayer funding. Other excuses will now have to be found for these junkets. Irrelevant also now is the massive governmental research funding for the many scientists currently engaged in studying mankind's effects on sealevels, glacier retreats and retreating polar ice.
NIWA and the CSIRO were entirely misled and were colluding with frauds when they came up with their stories and warnings of global warming due to man. There never was any way of proving man had anything to do with observed climate/weather variations. We know from ClimateGate how the figures were fiddled and the books cooked so that the research funding would continue. Previous politicians like Al Gore, Tony Blair, Helen Clark, Jeanette Fitzsimmons, Kevin Rudd and Barrack Obama owe the world an apology. So do present politicians who are carrying on the same lies and deceptions, like David Cameron, Julia Goddard, and John Key. Also we might hear apologies from highprofile NZ scientists like Jim Salinger and David Wratte, and the NZ Metservice, all who have been active in trying to convince the public of global warming due to man. Or are they now going to disagree with the IPCC? If so, they have never done that before.
The Green Party's environmentalist policies that penalise for emissions are unnecessary. That goes for the Green movement all over the world, all environmentalists who stop you on a street corner and ask you to sign petitions and all "green" organisations that specialise in media stunts that "spread awareness of manmade global warming" like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.
There is no need to penalise farming and agriculture for a nonexistant problem. Cows' belches and farts are safe. There is no methane problem. Cattle can take off those stupid emission-detecting collars. Methane has always been inflammable and disappears in lightning.
We can separate pollution and climate in an academic setting. Cities will continue to smother themsleves in fumes, as cities always do because cities are where the factories and supermarkets are and they need vehickes coming and going. People like to live near their places of work and so must drive. If we all lived in the country and drove to work then there would be even more emissions. So what do the Greens want? When they sort that out they may realise that the world is safe and is not going to burn to a crisp just because people drive SUVs. Cities have always been places of pollution, nothing has changed. The weather and climate have always been separate from cities. Warming a small piece of land by putting factories, roads and houses only affects the air in the vicinity to a few hundred feet. Weather has always been generated between 8-12 miles up and is unaltered by what is in the air a few feet from the ground.
The computer models that projected 100 years ahead are incorrect to the point of deliberate deception and misrepresentation, just to create a result that would satisfy governments looking for excuses to impose more taxes. The sealevels were supposed to go up by 65 meters in a century, according to Al Gore. All countries were supposed to raise in temperature between 0-2degC in a century according to the IPCC. This was claimed to be going to bring about a huge variety of detrimental effects.
Scaremongering by Al Gore was pointless and deceptive. His film An Inconvenient Truth won a Hollywood award. For fiction. Glacier crumbling scenes used polystyrene blocks. Gore runs a business selling carbon credits to governments.
The Warehouse and Pac'N'Save can stop charging for their plastic bags. Plastic is not the enemy. Ripoffs are, in the endless ruthless exploitation of do-gooders by large corporations raising their prices using "fixing the environment" as the excuse and rationale, in league with their corrupt taxgathering governments, and in the name of helping future generations to have a better world. Paying 10c for a plastic bag from The Warehouse, when they buy them for a fortieth of a cent each, is not a bargain.
We can stop scaring our children and we can cancel the environmentalist propaganda. It has been child abuse. Teachers can share the shame of causing children to have sleepless nights, worrying that by being naughty if they inadvertently leave a light or a heater on, then they are helping the world to end.
There is no such thing as climate change, other than what is natural, and what is natural is cyclic. It has always been that way, over the 4.5billion years of the world's existence. Climate cannot change, because climate means latitude, the distance a country is from the equator. Climate cannot change unless a country changes its distance from the equator. Climate means change, if seasons and of the variability of seasons, over a cycle of about 18-20 years. Humans have lived through at least 20 ice ages and have adapted each time, because we are still here. So are many other species. 99% of all species that have ever existed are now extinct, but through natural evolution only. Human activity does not cause most extinctions. On the other hand there are some extinctions that we can try to eliminate for the greater good: for instance the AIDS virus, smallpox, diphtheria, polio and malaria.
NZ First, ACT and the Conservative Party are the only parties so far who seem to be prepared to tell the truth. They do not support the ETS or global warming measures that deprive the agricultural sector. They have all expressed policies that will wind down our unaffordable international commitments to environmentalism. Of the three it seems to have been NZ First Party that has lead the way in questioning the phony science of global warming, and they are the most likely to be effective in the coming electoral term when it comes to telling the real truth. But it is as well to realise that the NZ First Party are shunned and demonised by the NZ media for that reason. This website does not claim any political allegiance, but we do seek allegiance to truth.
The sun and moon control the weather as they always have done. The sun supplies the heat which causes evaporation which brings rain. The moon causes tides which include tides in the air which is both above and joined to the sea, and the moon's movement between hemispheres changes barometric pressures.
The population myth has also been a con. There are not too many people in the world, causing CO2 to wreck the atmosphere. CO2 belongs to the atmosphere because before vegetation evolved the air was CO2-enriched. All the CO2 can return to the air without any problem by being released through emissions. All the people in the world could live in the North Island of NZ at a density of living of that in Indonesian cities. There is plenty of room on the planet. The problem facing mankind is only mismanagement of resources and industry due to greed.
If global warming due to man was ever happening, then longrange weather prediction would be impossible. So would predictions of tide tables, because no one could know what sealevels would be in coming months and years, and if the volume of the sea changed in some random way, then so would the timing of the tides. But longrange projection of these is possible, by studying cycles. Global warming dictated that cycles were irrelevant, and that all weather was random, bizarre, unusual, chaotic and getting more extreme. It said we would be getting more hurricanes, more floods and droughts, more heatwaves and snowdumps. Yet all of these happen in good measure each year around the world in places that are for various reasons always prone to them. Flood locations are low-lying, snow comes to the higher hills, heatwaves come to places near the equator or fed by equatorial wind systems, and hurricanes begin at the equator and affect countries at or near the equatorial band. We are not getting snow at the equator and heatwaves at the poles. Nor are we getting any weather events that have not occurred before. The older societies have extensive records going back many thousands of years that describe these, but the newer western countries do not have such records. The day that climate change occurs will be the day you see snow on Rangitoto mid February and covering Arnemland, and heatwaves in Antarctica during July. Hmm..good luck with that one.