European Parliament told: There is no climate emergency

Posted: November 24, 2019 by oldbrew in climate, Natural Variation, Temperature
Tags: , ,

Earth and climate – an ongoing controversy

But groupthink and the fog of constant alarmist propaganda makes it hard for many people to see through to the mundane truth, that their emotions are being exploited in ways that have little or nothing to do with the climate.

At a press conference on Wednesday (20th November), the European Parliament was told: ‘there is no climate emergency’.

One MEP became emotional and accused the organisers of ‘collective manslaughter’ on future generations, reports The GWPF.

The press conference was hosted by the European Conservatives and Reformists group in the European Parliament, who formally received the climate declaration from Professor Guus Berkhout.

Professor Berkhout represents the Climate Intelligence Foundation (Clintel), a Dutch group who have collected signatures from over 700 prominent scientists and professionals in support of the basic statement: there is no climate emergency.

Signatories include Nobel laureate, Professor Ivar Giaever, who made important experimental discoveries regarding superconductors, and the influential mathematician and physicist Professor Freeman Dyson.

The Liberal Democrat MEP, Irina von Wiese, took umbrage at the declaration, and refused to believe IPCC statements about a lack of any global trends in extreme weather events.

The declaration was supported by an addendum, setting out the scientific justification for the statement:

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed at less than half the rate predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 can also be beneficial.

CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.

Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm.

Full article here.

  1. oldbrew says:

    Update: Boris Calls on Britons to Make UK ‘Corbyn-Neutral by Christmas’ 🤗
    – – –
    Will they embarrass themselves…

    Channel 4 to host UK’s first leaders’ debate on climate change

    It is awaiting confirmation from Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage

    Those who have agreed to take part in the one-hour special programme are Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Liberal Democrats leader Jo Swinson, the Scottish National Party (SNP) leader Nicola Sturgeon and co-leaders of the Green Party Jonathan Bartley and Sian Berry.

    The usual suspects will be churning out the usual crackpot ideas while trying to keep a straight face and pretend it’s all for your own good to dismantle the economy.
    – – –
    How ‘climate logic’ works… 😆

    One Family’s Solution To Climate Change
    Posted on November 23, 2019 by tonyheller

  2. Gamecock says:

    ‘Signatories include Nobel laureate, Professor Ivar Giaever, who made important experimental discoveries regarding superconductors, and the influential mathematician and physicist Professor Freeman Dyson.’

    Argumentum Ad Verecundiam. Appeal to inappropriate authority. These fine gentlemen are not known for their knowledge of meteorology. Invoking their names is cheezy.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Someone has to push back against the likes of Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, the BBC and so forth. In-post climate and meteorology people have an employer to consider when making public statements, if they want to keep their careers going.

    In any case quoting authorities on a topic doesn’t require someone to be an authority on that topic themselves.

  4. ivan says:

    Unfortunately since they were talking to politicians nothing will happen to change the stupidity of the green blob.

    I doubt it will be reported by the MSM so very few real people will hear about it and with the state of education today very few will know anything about those scientists signing it.

  5. stpaulchuck says:

    ” ‘collective manslaughter’ on future generations”

    the typical non-scientific overheated emotion based hyperbole of warmists and their masters, the power mad pols, all meant to stampede the public into yielding even more power and money to these charlatans.

    To quote my British friends, “What a load of codswallop!”

  6. JB says:

    “President Eisenhower stated that ‘in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we
    should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.'”
    “There is a popular argument that the world’s oldest profession is sexual prostitution. I think that it is
    far more likely that the oldest profession is scientific prostitution, and that it is still alive and well, and thriving in the 20th century.”
    “The people who tend to believe more in theories than in the scientific method of testing theories, and who ignore the evidence against the theories they believe in, should be considered pseudoscientists and not true scientists. To the extent that the professed beliefs are based on the desire for status, wealth, or political reasons, these people are scientific prostitutes.” The Farce of Physics, BG Wallace

    Prostitutes in white coats, indeed. The bias that has grown up in the scientific profession that only those who are specifically EMPLOYED (and specifically indoctrinated at University) in a select field are authorities to refer to is crippling its advancement. Just what constitutes “authority” in science? Graduates of Oxford, Purdue, Yale, Princeton, Harvard, MIT? I thought it was falsification through testing.

    We live in an age of overwhelming numbers of True Believers, who, when faced with facts contrary to their beliefs, shut down all consideration and discussion.

    “He who is free to draw conclusions from his individual experience and observation is not usually hospitable to the idea of martyrdom. For self-sacrifice is an unreasonable act. It cannot be the end-product of a process of probing and deliberating. All active mass movements strive, therefore, to interpose a factproof screen between the faithful and the realities of the world. They do this by claiming that the ultimate and absolute truth is already embodied in their doctrine and that there is no truth nor certitude outside it. The facts on which the true believer bases his conclusions must not be derived from his experience or observation but from holy writ.” p79 The True Believer, Eric Hoffer

  7. Stephen Richards says:

    Gamecock says:
    November 24, 2019 at 12:10 pm

    Freeman is one of the greatest physicists of our time. His knowledge far exceeds anything a so called climatologist can muster

  8. Stephen Richards says:

    I was watching the UKMO studio youtube tuesday and someone asked (I think it was sarc) whether the current severe cold across the NH was due to climate change global warming. The met guy retorted (sic) don’t be silly. Weather isn’t climate. ??????? 😉

  9. oldbrew says:

    Weather isn’t climate – unless it agrees with ‘the models’ 🤩


  10. tom0mason says:

    So lets not ignore human history and natural history.
    History that shows that overall when the climate was warm the biosphere expanded, while humans flourished. When the climate was cooler the biosphere receded, while human existence got very stressed, often with a large large numbers of people perishing prematurely.
    Overall a warmer climate is beneficial to the biosphere and humans, a cooler climate is generally more stressful for nature and humans with consequential increases in losses of life.

  11. Gamecock says:

    ‘Freeman is one of the greatest physicists of our time. His knowledge far exceeds anything a so called climatologist can muster’

    People use fallacies because they work.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s