Paul Homewood writes at blog "Not A Lot People Know That" how global temperatures have returned to levels of 2002. Also scroll down to the interesting comments which follow, especially this one: "Never have so many been conned by so few for so much."
Sorry not to have found this earlier but this post from Towerofreason.blogspot.com tells the full story about how the lie about 97% of scientists agree with man-made global warming was cooked up.
Economist Bjorn Lomborg writes: "This British parliament declared the other day the planet was facing a 'climate emergency', making the UK the first country to do so after cities such as Los Angeles, London, Vancouver and Basel. It’s a move that sums up all that is wrong with climate policy: politicians are making grandiose, fearmongering declarations that are divorced from economic reality, as well as from what will fix the problem they claim to be addressing. Political rhetoric is cheap but drastic cuts in carbon dioxide emissions remain prohibitively expensive and technologically challenging."
The climatologist Professor Bill Gray passed away in 2016. One of the world’s leading experts on tropical hurricanes and the initiator of seasonal hurricane forecasts he was also a prominent critic of mainstream views on climate change, arguing that natural processes play a much more important role...
An American blog, "Climatism", posts comments by 46 people who have been expert reviewers of reports by the UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and have subsequently questioned its accuracy and its integrity.
Professor Michael Kelly, emeritus Professor of Technology at Cambridge University, was one of 43 Fellows of the Royal Society in UK who in 2016 accused the RS of being dogmatic on the topic of climate change. Dr Kelly wrote about the challenge in the Mail on Sunday, and his article is relevant two years later in New Zealand in view of the complaint by members of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition against the Royal Society of New Zealand alleging misleading statements in this country about causes of changes in climate.
[Link to pdf](Kelly on RS.pdf)
This paper, "Climate Thinking - Broadening the Horizons"by Dutch climate scientist Professor Guus Berkhout, is probably the most layperson-friendly, and comprehensive explanation of the origins and the falsity of the 'global warming' hysteria we have even encountered. We are grateful to the UK's Global Warming Policy Foundation for permission to add it to our website.
This is a second posting of a paper by three of the world's most distinguished climate science authorities: Professors Will Happer, Steven Koonin and Richard Lindzen, which some of our followers have had difficulty in accessing from our website. It is a convincing and timeless document, that concludes: "Projections of future climate and weather events rely on models demonstrably unfit for the purpose. As a result, rising levels of CO2 do not obviously pose an immediate, let alone imminent, threat to the earth’s climate."
And here is a commentary by our Climate Science Coalition chair, Hon Barry Brill: Link to Barry
U.S. analyst Dr Ed Berry writes: "We have already won the science debate, but few people understand this. The alarmists have no scientific case. Now we must win the political debate....Our task is great. We must show the public why human CO2 does not change the climate. Our goal is to get climate change out of politics and back into science. The idea that we have a 'climate emergency' is a product of a crippled mind."
Extract from a reply by astronaut Harrison Schmitt on climate change: "Right now, in my profession[geology], there is no evidence. There are models. But models of very, very complex natural systems are often wrong. The observations that we make as geologists, and observational climatologists, do not show any evidence that human beings are causing this. Now, there is a whole bunch of unknowns."
"Seriously, folks, we’re supposed to be seeing all kinds of bad stuff. But none of it has happened. No cities gone underwater. No increase in heat waves or cold waves. No islands sinking into the ocean. No increase in hurricanes. No millions of climate refugees. The tragedies being pushed by the failed serial doomcasters for the last 30 years simply haven’t come to pass." Willis Eschenbach posts at WUWT.
The climate change debate might be one of the worst cases of academic suppression in history. CLINTEL (the Climate Intelligence Foundation) has issued the Magna Carta Universitatum 2020. This short document is basically an aspirational code of conduct for freedom of inquiry and speech at universities. The first Magna Carta Universitatum was issued in 1988 and to date at least 889 universities have signed on to it. CLINTEL notes that it is building directly on this precedent, to fit “the special challenges of today”. For each of the five principles enunciated, CLINTEL cites a climate example.
The Cornwall Alliance posts an article from the Washington Times that tells us: "In short, a great deal of what the mainstream media report, and politicians tout, as the sure results of solid climate science are anything but. The best evidence continues to be that natural causes of climate change—whether warming or cooling, wetting or drying, blowing or calming—far outweigh human contribution through CO2 and other greenhouse gases. So, don’t be tricked into embracing climate-change/global-warming alarmism. There’s science, and then there’s sleight-of-hand masquerading as science."
Britain’s plans to decarbonise the economy have not been properly thought through, and there is a dangerous lack of systems and project engineering input. That’s according to Michael Kelly, emeritus professor of technology in the Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge, who says that replacing fossil fuels with electricity from renewables is impractical on the timescale of 2050.“It’s clear that there has been little or no systems engineering input into the plans. How can we possibly proceed further along the renewables path when we lack any technology to store electricity at scale? How can we hope to electrify transport when we would need to consume the whole global annual supply of several important minerals to do so, just for the UK?” And Professor Kelly warns that the costs of decarbonising will be ruinous of our current standards of living.
Courtesy of New Zealand's most widely-read blog, The BFD, this post by US CFact analyst, Peter Murphy says: "Some of the wealthiest people on the planet are driving and funding the climate change political agenda for more electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels, and eradication of nuclear energy and fossil fuels. Their message is clear: America and the world must reduce their reliance on traditional energy sources and adapt in order to save the planet. That means higher costs, less energy consumption and reduced living standards."
We've just picked up on this video which recounts the text of a letter from Canadian climate skeptic Dr Ross McKitrick in which he talks about what happens to people who openly challenge the current wave of propaganda alleging man-made climate change. Watch this video if you need help to stand up to the alarmists.(Thanks to Whaleoil Beef Hooked blog - link takes a few seconds to load).
Dr David Whitehouse, of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London has been looking at how nature has reacted to forecasts of global warming, and shows that the rise in CO2 levels has not been accompanied by the claimed increases in temperature.