Quoting from the report: ‘Mörner, meanwhile, cautioned promoters of the man-made warming hypothesis that they were going to ultimately be exposed, with catastrophic consequences for the scientific community.’
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) is misleading humanity about climate change and sea levels, explained Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, the retired head of the paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University. By Alex Newman @ The New American.
– – –
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.”
Continued here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
[…] via UN IPCC Scientist blows whistle on lies about climate, sea level — Tallbloke’s Talkshop […]
Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:
From the main article;
Mörner, meanwhile, cautioned promoters of the man-made warming hypothesis that they were going to ultimately be exposed, with catastrophic consequences for the scientific community. “This is so unscientific,” he said, condemning climatologists for ignoring facts that contradict their climate models. “And that is a terrible thing, this unscientific part of it. Because one day, it will all be revealed as nonsense. And then we lose our trustworthiness.” The data will not change, he said. And it is clear. If nothing else, when the next cooling phase begins — “everything points to that we are going into a new so-called grand solar minimum and that is in the middle of this century, maybe even as early as 2030” — then everybody will realize how wrong the warmists have been. That is when the “rats will leave the sinking ship,” he said.
We can but hope, although the likelyhood is it will be blamed on aerosols. Because you know there’s only x years to save the
banquetingplanet.Does he give a reason for the rising temperatures the last 20 years.
Let’s help out thegoosefish…
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.” [bold added]
“…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.”..”
No. We don’t. We are more active than that. In post-modern science we fire anyone who steps out of line, and end their career….
There hasn’t been any warming in last 20 years. There has warming from time period when the news media were warning the public that we entering an ice age.
There also appears there has been some warming in the last 100 years. Since the end of the period of time called the Little Ice Age.
It seems that during the centuries of the Little Ice Age, sea levels were dropping and that following the Little Ice age, it appears that sea levels have risen [at rate of about 7″ per century or less].
I disagree that there is no evidence of sea levels rising over the last hundred years, but it seems there is more uncertainty, if you talking about last thousand years.
I think there is fair amount of agreement that over last 5000 years, there seems to be a slight cooling trend.
But there strong agreement that previous interglacial periods have had higher global temperatures and higher global sea levels. And I think global sea levels do rise and fall, though I agree that different oceans can rising or falling at same time, and there are a lot factors which make meaning a global sea level “complicated” and perhaps in terms periods less than 100 years, somewhat meaningless. Or said different way to say this, the pattern ocean regions falling or rising might more important than as compared the average of entire ocean. More important in the sense of allowing some ability predict the future.
Concise. Its the sun. Thank you.
The goosefish, it’s not that simple. “Temperatures” is not really an actual thing, and global average temperature even less of a thing. At the heart is energy. But the energy in the Earth’s climate system us extremely hard to measure, and the effects of changes to that system extremely hard to predict. Describing a complex, chaotic non-linear system with one dubious metric us m we shingles – it would be like describing the global economy using only the global average inflation rate.
Oops, that should say “with one dubious metric is meaningless -“
Reblogged this on ajmarciniak.
Dovetails nicely with his lecture (in English) from November 2018, (the 12 Internationale Klima – und Energiekonferenz).
He gave a clear and unmistakable message to all those attending the COP24 in Katowice last December 2018.
“And that is a terrible thing, this unscientific part of it. Because one day, it will all be revealed as nonsense. And then we lose our trustworthiness.”
This is the point I stressed at the end of my interview with Michelle Sterling from Friends of science at the Porto conference.
https://vimeo.com/290993668 Autogenerated password is Fos 🙂
They’ve been getting away with it for 30 years. They aren’t going to stop now.
Reblogged this on Climate- Science.