Paris Climate Challenge Releases Summary Statement

Posted: December 11, 2015 by tallbloke in Accountability, alarmism, climate, government, greenblob, IPCC, solar system dynamics
paris_banner_webIn association with the
Independent Committee on Geoethics www. www.geoethic.com
and the Collectif des Climato Réalistes www.www.skyfall.fr
Summary Statement
Over thirty years of intense (and extremely expensive) research has totally failed to produce any evidence that human emissions of CO2 are driving climate. CO2 is not a danger to but a benefit for all life on our planet.
We call on governments, NGOs and universities to stop pursuing policy and dogma based ‘evidence’ gathering.

• That they stop scaremongering.
•  That they dissolve the IPCC and the UNFCCC.
•  That governments focus instead on encouraging means of ensuring that under-developed and developing nations have full access to the cheapest reliable energy (particularly electricity), regardless of whether fossil fuels are used, so as to improve their access to clean water, low pollution cooking facilities and good medical services.
• That once respected academic institutions and scientific publications put their own houses in order and once again allow the free exchange of scientific ideas and results without prejudice.
• That those involved in alleged cases of scientific fraud, which have resulted in huge financial costs, causing greater poverty and many deaths among the poorest, be brought before the relevant Court of Law.
10th Dec 2015
Further, more detailed statements, references and videos of presentations at the Conference are available on the website: www.pcc15.org
Comments
  1. oldbrew says:

    If they could tear themselves away from computer models and look at some real data they might get somewhere.

    But as that wouldn’t give the answer their bosses want to hear, they don’t/can’t do that.

  2. “That governments focus instead on encouraging means of ensuring that under-developed and developing nations have full access to the cheapest reliable energy (particularly electricity), regardless of whether fossil fuels are used, so as to improve their access to clean water, low pollution cooking facilities and good medical services.”

    Just how are the impoverished to pay for electricity at £0.06 per unit
    Just how are they to pay for the infrastructure to get the electricity to their hoses.
    How are the suppliers to stop theft of electricity
    What are the appliances the impoverished to use the electricity Cooker? Kettles? Fridges? Who is to buy this stuff for them? who is to pay for the units used.

    Most agree the best route to local supply of remote areas are batteries and solar cells for led bulbs/mobile/laptop charging
    ——————-
    • That they dissolve the IPCC and the UNFCCC.

    So you want to stop just the collation of research? or do you want to stop all research into the climate? Is it inconvenient to have yet more research showing that we are on a path to ecocide-hide the path!
    ————————-
    • That once respected academic institutions and scientific publications put their own houses in order and once again allow the free exchange of scientific ideas and results without prejudice.

    Are you suggesting that they spend publication time on iron sun, chem trails, zero point energy, flat earth, sky dragon stuff?

    Surely non science should be rejected.

    I would be very interested in seeing what physical properties of magnetism cause warming, what physical aspects of LOD causes warming, what physical evidence there is for non earth planetary motion causing warming. But I can see proof that GHGs can cause back radiation, and can change the temperature that radiation finally leaves the earth..

  3. PeterMG says:

    There is an undercurrent of feeling across the Western World against our current form of authoritarian governments. Most don’t understand yet how to change it, but in the interim people will vote for extremes until those that think they hold the middle ground shift to where we the people think the middle ground is.

    Scientists for their part need not only to look at real data, but also understand that they have destroyed the credibility of science and turned it into a religion. And just as the majority of those in the west (or east) don’t really believe in the imaginary being, especially which one is the “right” one, we are not for a long time going to take science seriously again. In a way climate science is the least of the “problems” that currently afflict science.

  4. rishrac says:

    Climate change has become a hegemonic organization. The actors will be back at work to support CAGW. It’s goal is the destruction of western democracy. In their manifest that action should be be done now and the fate of the planet is more important than the rights of people. The wanted poster in Paris prove that. They have set themselves up as judge jury and executioner without due process or the inherent legal right to do so. On their part, fraud, lying and deception are ok and is intended and understood to further the cause.

    That’s why it is so difficult to have meaningful debate with them or at all. Without this manifest, CAGW would have declined and now be just about nonexistent instead of trying to hobble together a world wide agreement. The Paris agreement is a long way from Kyoto.

  5. oldbrew says:

    John Kerry: ‘the situation in the US is such that legally binding with respect to finance is a killer for the agreement.’

    He knows he can’t sell that in his own elected forum.

    See more at: http://www.thegwpf.com/us-threatens-to-walk-out-if-financial-obligations-made-legally-binding/

  6. ntesdorf says:

    COP21 has nothing to do with the Climate or CO2, it has descended into a battle of political Egos, mis-directed altruism, a sort of disguised fascism. The aim of the UN/IPCC is to churn money and remove a lot of it as it passes by them. The redistribution is achieved under the cloak of CAGW and when it is no longer needed it will be shed. It is in fact just a huge scam created by organised Banking Crime under the guise of Charity and pseudo-science. For poor countries, access to cheap power and electricity is the top priority to improve their access to clean water, health and medical services. Extra will just help their plants grow faster and reduce water requirements.

  7. oldbrew says:

    ‘But I can see proof that GHGs can cause back radiation’ – tfp

    Most GHG is water vapour, CO2 is a small sideshow.

  8. tallbloke says:

    I bet Ford won’t comment on the lack of any observable water vapour feedback capable of doing anything exciting to the temperature.

  9. manicbeancounter says:

    The press is full of the ground-breaking deal achieved in Paris earlier today. It is nothing of the sort.
    It is worth reading the agreement.
    http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf
    Particularly paragraphs 17 and 21

    P17 states that the INDCs are nowhere close to being on track for the 2C limit. That would require emissions in 2030 to be 40 gigatonnes or less, whereas the forecast (with policy) is for 55 gigatonnes.
    In P21 the UNFCCC asks the UNIPCC for some more scary stories and some more modelled emissions forecasts. There is a lot of hot air, but no global plans at all to reach any 2C target.

    http://manicbeancounter.com/2015/12/13/no-global-plan-from-cop21-paris-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions/

  10. E.M.Smith says:

    @Theferdprefect:

    The IPCC et al is a political body unrelated to science and devoted to socialist wealth redistribution. Nothing would be lost in their demise and much would be gained (or at least the theft reduced).

    As for how the poor nations are to pay for things: The same way every poor nation advances. Jobs, industry, rule of law. Worked for Europe, North America, Asia (China, Vietnam, Japan, Taiwan, Indonesia, etc etc etc) Look at post W.W.II Europe, Asia et.al. as examples of poverty and destruction to wealth creation. Or my poor Irish ancestors arriving in the USA with nothing in th 1800s.

    I presume you can find in the Climategate Emails where editors of journals were being threatened and publications blocked via political means… Intimidation and coertion and shunning are not moral nor valid parts of the scientific method.

  11. oldbrew says:

    mbc says: ‘The press is full of the ground-breaking deal achieved in Paris earlier today.’

    For ‘ground-breaking’ read ‘side-splitting’ – it’s hilarious to hear them uttering the words ‘save the planet’.
    They flatter themselves beyond belief.

    Shame about the pointless expense and potential disruption of economies though😦

  12. ren says:

    The ice in the Arctic grows fastest in 10 years. Now it will grow ice on Greenland Sea.

  13. markstoval says:

    ‘But I can see proof that GHGs can cause back radiation’ – tfp

    This one always gets me. Ok, radiation goes in all directions. Prove that any so-called back-radiation does anything. Prove that it warms the surface. Show me some observations and measurements.

    I think The Chiefio’s lighthearted post on back radiation might help you.
    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/07/we-dont-need-no-stinking-back-radiation/

  14. michael hart says:

    I note that the plonkers have arbitrarily decided that they would now like a “1.5 °C” target instead of 2.0 °C, like they have a clue what that would actually mean in any real world. But they seem to have forgotten to also mention how many tropical cyclones they would like per year.

  15. oldbrew says:

    MH: a “1.5 °C” target instead of 2.0 °C probably looks better on the computer models.

    What could possibly go wrong? Just consult the computer and – hey presto! – it shall come to pass in the real world, as if by magic. Or not:/

  16. p.g.sharrow says:

    Limiting Gorbal Warming to less then 1,5c is no problem.
    GOD has already turned the thermostat down.😉
    Next, Hanson will be crying out about industrail caused global cooling, his meme of the 1970s …pg

  17. tallbloke says:

    Ren: The warmists are bleating about the high Arctic surface air temperature anomaly. Your plot of the record ice growth this Autumn and winter is a nice demonstration that ice extent has little to do with surface air temperature, and therefore nothing to do with the wondergas, CO2.

  18. jim says:

    The differential is interesting. If my memory is correct weren’t we at 2 deg C above ice age temperatures now. So they are calling for a report, damning 1st world countries, already, without waiting for any meaningful study? No study because the world is not that responsive to what a human could do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s