Environmentalism as a religion

The mainstream media has played a hugely successful role in corrupting the ‘science’ of global warming, aka climate change, into the fashionable new eco-religion that it has become today.

Add literally, trillions of government ‘green’ (taxpayer money), a ton of celebrity eco-virtue-signalling, a pinch of data manipulation, and the religion of ‘climate change’ has rapidly morphed into, as Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University California, famously coined in his blistering resignation letter to the APS:

“The greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.”

Hence, we give thanks to “The world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate change” – WUWT, led by Pastor Watts, for giving us our daily dose of climate reason and rationalism! Amen 🙏

Nice post Anthony.

Watts Up With That?

clip_image001

The late Dr. Michael Crichton was wonderful writer. In 2003 he presented a wonderful essay in San Francisco equating environmentalism to religion. Nobel prize winning physicist Dr. Ivar Giaver makes the same point in a presentation here. In religion man is meant to be saved from the consequences of his sins. In the environmentalist religion the world was a wonderful, beautiful Eden until man and his technology came along. Man has eaten the apple and lost Eden. Now we must give up our “evil” technology and go back to nature, otherwise all is lost.

As Crichton notes:

“There is no Eden. There never was. What was that Eden of the wonderful mythic past? Is it the time when infant mortality was 80%, when four children in five died of disease before the age of five? When one woman in six died in childbirth? When the average lifespan was 40…

View original post 476 more words


IPCC In Complete Denial That The Sun Is Causing Global Cooling

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.

– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world
.”
– Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment

•••

The IPCC is the United Nations body most responsible for spreading panic about global warming and the body with a strong vested interest in keeping that panic alive.

So it came with no surprise that last weeks “Summary For Policymakers” (a document written to scare the public and politicians into providing more funding into their own research and their own political agenda) concluded with 95% certainty that human’s have caused most of the warming since 1950. Their confidence upgraded from 90% in the 2007 AR4 climate report. The increasing certainty quite outrageous when you consider the IPCC has gained confidence in catastrophic warming (with each subsequent report) even as temperatures have declined :

screenhunter_1013-sep-28-00-13

Another interesting and contradictory fact is the IPCC has experienced No Warming For 70% Of Its Entire History!

via Real Science :

No Warming For 70% Of The IPCC’s History

Posted on September 27, 2013 by 

We are now at AR5 with zero warming since AR4. The last IPCC report which actually experienced any warming was SAR in 1995. In fact, the vast majority of the IPCC’s history has seen zero warming, and prior to that the warming was primarily due to rebound from Mt. Pinatubo cooling.

This complete lack of warming through most of the IPCC’s history has led them to 95% certainty that humans are heating the world out of control.

That level of certainty “has increased with every report,” notes Dr. Hayhoe, an expert reviewer for the IPCC. “Because we have more data, we have more science, we have more observations.”

For IPCC, Confidence Only Grows in Human Contribution to Climate Change – weather.com

•••

In fact there has been no statistically-significant global warming for the majority of the satellite era or around 17-23 years, despite skyrocketing emissions over the same period :

trend

Screen Shot 2013-12-08 at , December 8, 4.42.52 PM

Source – C3: 20 Years of Satellite Global Measurements: No Significant Warming, Trend Robustly Below IPCC Expert Predictions

The observed temperature reality of there being no global warming over the past 15-17 years had alarm bells ringing for the global warming cult prior to the release of the IPCC’s latest ‘climate bible’ report. Armed with such ‘bad news’, some policy makers and governments, fearing the observational facts could hinder their ability to implement climate taxes and draconian emission controls, possibly limit climate related funding and tarnish scientific reputations, sort to have the lack of global warming eliminated from the latest report.

For the alarmist IPCC scientists, it’s a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t situation. Bringing up the warming stop surely will be ammo for the skeptics, but so would ignoring it. Should we feel sorry for them? I don’t think so. It was they themselves who manoeuvred their own jewels between the jaws of the vise. Last chance to pull them out!

Die Welt Veteran Journalist: “Ignoring Warming Stop Would Be Ridiculous”, Missing Heat “Perhaps Just Doesn’t Exist”

Screen Shot 2013-10-08 at , October 8, 6.49.09 PM

The report is still in a draft version and will be finalised over the next five days with heated discussion centring on how to explain the fact that since 1998 the earth’s temperature has barely risen.

It is claimed some governments have even tried to intervene to remove references to the 15 year climate change ‘hiatus’ or ‘pause’.

Row over IPCC report as nations ‘try to hide lack of climate change’ – Telegraph

•••

The warming ‘Pause’ was vaguely mentioned in the latest IPCC report, albeit claiming the “Missing heat” is hiding in the deep oceans, where quite conveniently we have no accurate measuring capabilities.

What the IPCC should be spending their billions of dollars of taxpayers money on, is answering the BIG climate question of why has the planet been cooling since 2002? Because a step back into a new Ice-Age, which is what the data tells us, has far worse implications than the IPCC’s modelled warming of 1-2°C by 2100, which would most likely be beneficial to humanity.

Former Climate professor Dr Tim Ball explains what’s really happening with our climate and importantly discusses what is going on with that big yellow fire-ball in the sky which the IPCC deems plays no part in climate change.

Via WND Radio

CLIMATE GURU PUTS ‘GLOBAL WARMING’ ON ICE

Low sunspot activity means Earth chilling until at least 2030

Screen Shot 2013-10-08 at , October 8, 5.22.47 PM

Far from being the final word on climate change, last week’s United Nations report suggesting near certainty that human activity is causing a rise in Earth’s temperatures is actually further proof that the conventional wisdom is dead wrong and the Earth is cooling right on schedule, according to one of the leading scientists who is skeptical of the climate-change premise.

Last week, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, reported it was 95 percent certain that climate change was the result of human activity, specifically the burning of fossil fuels that emit “greenhouse gases.”

“That’s the result that they get when you premeditate your science,” said Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. “When you set out to establish a certain scientific outcome and you program your computers to do that, you shouldn’t be surprised if that’s the result you get. The problem is what they’re getting out of their computers is not fitting with what’s actually happening. Of course, that’s been the problem with the IPCC all along.”

Ball told WND the deception of the IPCC and its allies can be seen in how the reports are released, with the policy statement drawing headlines while the scientific information comes later and is largely ignored.

“(The summary for policymakers) is a document written to scare to public and scare the politicians into providing more funding for their own research and their own political agenda,” he said. “The actual science report, which it supposedly is based on isn’t going to be released right away. They’ve always done it his way because the summary for policymakers completely disagrees with what the science report is saying. They know that the media and the public are not going to read the science report. And they also know that if any of them get into it, they won’t understand it anyway.”

The latest data actually show temperatures have dropped in recent years. The IPCC and other scientists have branded this as a “pause” in climate change. Ball said that characterization implies that temperatures are temporarily holding steady and will inevitably rise again soon. He said that conclusion is dead wrong.

“The temperature is going down and has for 17 years while carbon dioxide increases,” Ball said. “According to their hypothesis and model, that’s simply not supposed to happen. Rather than doing what they should do and coming out and saying, ‘Our science is wrong, our models are wrong and we apologize for all the inconvenience we’ve caused you,’ they’re just plowing ahead.”

The long-held contention of those who warn of climate catastrophe is that rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere lead to higher temperatures. So if that belief is incorrect, why are temperatures getting cooler?

“The sun is causing the cooling that’s going on. The sun reached a peak of activity around 2000 and has been declining ever since,” said Ball, who noted that the cooling trend will continue for years to come.

“We’re heading toward what occurred around the year 1800. It was called the Dalton Minimum of low sunspot activities,” he explained. “We certainly are down to that in number of sunspots this year. That means the cooling will continue at least until 2030 and yet the government is preparing for warming, which is outrageous. Some people think that this cycle of sunspot activity and global cooling will take us down to as cold as it was around 1680, which was the nadir of the Little Ice Age.”

More evidence backing up Ball’s position comes from the polar regions. New reports from the National Snow and Ice Data Center suggest Antarctic ice levels are at record highs. Ball said the southern hemisphere has been cooling for some time. He believes the clinching evidence comes from the Arctic Circle.

“This was the year that even one scientist at NASA predicted that the Arctic ice in the summer would be gone completely,” he said. “Well, there’s 60 percent more ice this year than last year and the reason is because of the cooling sun and the cooling temperatures.”

Ball also rejects the contention that climate change brings on more extreme weather events, not just higher temperatures. He said hurricane season was very quiet this year and tornadoes were down as well. He chalked up record high and low temperatures to the jet stream shifting from a west-east flow to more of a north-south line.

The “premeditated” science is a major culprit for the climate-change concerns, according to Ball. But he also blames the media.

“The main reason they were able to get away with what they’ve gotten away with is that a majority of the mainstream media were complicit in what (the IPCC and other scientists) were doing,” Ball said. “This is where the Founding Fathers have been corrupted because they believed the media would be the watchdogs, the gatekeepers. The mainstream media have failed completely.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/climate-guru-puts-global-warming-on-ice/#zl75UEUU9AMvf7mi.99

•••

Global Cooling Related:

Related IPCC AR5 Articles :

Climatism Links :


IPCC 1995/2001 : Declining Winter Snow Cover

Real Science

Published: September 18, 1995

The picture of probable disruption, including adverse changes and some that are beneficial, emerges from draft sections of a new assessment of the climate problem by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and from interviews with scientists involved in the assessment. The panel, a United Nations group of 2,500 scientists from around the world, advises parties to a 1992 treaty that are negotiating reductions in heat-trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.

*A “striking” retreat of mountain glaciers around the world, accompanied in the Northern Hemisphere by a shrinking snow cover in winter.

http://select.nytimes.com

ScreenHunter_137 Feb. 09 12.39

ScreenHunter_136 Feb. 09 12.39

IPCC Third Assessment Report – Climate Change 2001

Since the IPCC made these brilliant predictions, the Northern Hemisphere has had five of the six snowiest winters on record

ScreenHunter_1280 Oct. 04 22.06

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

ScreenHunter_1281 Oct. 04 22.10

The IPCC has nothing to do with science. They get everything wrong, and then the next…

View original post 15 more words


The 2013 IPCC AR5 Report: Facts -vs- Fictions

Watch Dr Don Easterbrook ‘torpedo’ the man-made global warming theory in this U.S. Senate Climate Change hearing – Tuesday March 26th 2013, 1:30PM

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor of Geology, Western Washington University

Mark Twain popularized the saying “There are liars, damn liars, and statisticians.” After reading the recently-released [IPCC AR5] report, we can now add, ‘there are liars, damn liars, and IPCC.” When compared to the also recently published NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) 1000+-page volume of data on climate change with thousands of peer-reviewed references, the inescapable conclusion is that the IPCC report must be considered the grossest misrepresentation of data ever published. As MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen stated, “The latest IPCC report has truly sunk to the level of hilarious incoherence—it is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.”

From the IPCC 2013 Report

clip_image002

After all these years, IPCC still doesn’t get it—we’ve been thawing out from…

View original post 876 more words


Marx on Monday: IPCC

The IPCC spend billions of dollars of other people’s money drawing together 30 pages of conclusions in “Summary For Policymakers” to pressure policy makers, with a 95% certainty, to go and spend $95 billion more dollars, of other people’s money, to try and stop a planet warming that hasn’t warmed in 17 years.

 

For a lot less money and only 5 minutes of their precious time, they could just as easily read this divine piece from the Marxist, for the same effect….only this time get the painful truth! ;p

 

I’m lovin :

  • “Rajendra thinks that Hitler is still alive and living in a condo in Palm Springs with Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden – where they are planning to destroy the world by burning fossil fuels around the clock”
  •  “It’s a storm in a tea cup Kevin,” Rajendra replied, “or it would be – if there were any storms.”

Gold.

 

Great read Kevin, TQ.

Bogpaper.com

Last week when parts of the IPCC’s much heralded “Climate Change Report” were leaked to the press I, as much as any liberal, found myself despairing at some of its findings. No global warming for 16 years; record levels of sea ice; so many polar bears that the UN was proposing a humane cull to limit their numbers; no extreme weather conditions like hurricanes and typhoons – and – worst of all – the computer forecasts were wrong and there was no global warming! I felt like I did when as a child I found out that there was no Santa Claus!

Thank goodness, therefore, for the IPCC – the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. When I was a young boy I remember going to the theatre to see Peter Pan. I, along with the rest of the children, became very upset when Tinkerbell was dying, but Peter Pan saved…

View original post 1,846 more words


Shock News : Big Government Money Is Corrupting Climate Science

Real Science

Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth And Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, says the IPCC is taking a huge credibility hit over the hiatus – and its pronouncement that it is 95 percent certain that human activity is responsible for most global warming.

“I’m not happy with the IPCC,” she told Fox News. “I think it has torqued the science in an unfortunate direction.”

That torquing, she suggests, is because the money in climate science (the funding, that is) is tied to embellishing the IPCC narrative, especially the impacts of global warming. She is critical of the IPCC’s leadership as well, in particular its chairman, Rajendra Pachauri.

“They have explicit policy agendas,” Curry told Fox News. “Their proclamations are very alarmist and very imperative as to what we should be doing. And this does not inspire confidence in the final product.”

UN’s massive new climate report adds little explanation…

View original post 7 more words


No steel roof required: IPCC dials back the fear of extreme weather

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.

– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models
.”
– Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research

“Given that human actions are increasingly interfering with the delicate balance of nature, natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes and tsunamis will occur more frequently” – Dr Rajendra K Pachauri, IPCC Chief

ipcc_titanic

The IPCC have today released their full AR5 climate report after friday’s release of  the “The Summary For Policy Makers“.

The reports conclusions for extreme weather; droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes etc remain basically unchanged from previous findings that were released last year in the IPCC’s SREX report (Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters). Todays AR5 reports a level of “low confidence” that human greenhouse gas emissions have had any effect on extreme weather events.

Official IPCC Words from SREX report released 2012 : “We Do Not Know If The Climate Is Becoming More Extreme

The IPCC is the United Nations body most responsible for spreading panic about global warming and the body with a strong vested interest in keeping that panic alive. So given the “low confidence” finding between climate extremes and human gases is coming directly from them, indicates just how much the perceived ‘problem’ of climate change has been grossly overstated.

The backflip on extreme weather reaffirms again how misleading the global warming cabal has been with regard to its alarmist fear-mongering and baseless climate alarmism. All the while, society gulled into spending trillions of dollars on junk sciencemothballed desal plants, draconian carbon taxes and useless green energy schemes for literally nothing.

See also : Roger Pielke Jr.’s Blog: Coverage of Extreme Events in the IPCC AR5

•••

IPCC AR5 analysis via Herald Sun :

No steel roof required: IPCC dials back the fear of extreme weather

October 1, 2012

Global warming – dud predictionsGlobal warming – general

image

Professor Ross Garnaut in 2007, the very peak of global warming hysteria, told his local council he had to build a steel roof on his Melbourne home.

Garnaut, who wrote massive reports on global warming policy for the Rudd Government, argued he needed protection from the extreme weather he was sure we’d get from the change in the climate.

“Severe and more frequent hailstorms will be a feature of this change,” he wrote to the City of Yarra Council, explaining why he had to be excused from the council’s heritage overlay, which required slate roofs.

If I were Garnaut, it would not now read the full report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released yesterday. Reading it would be mortifying. The report is like watching global warming alarmists swallow a chill pill.

It’s important to recall the context for this latest IPCC report – how global warming alarmists have for a decade warned of all kinds of extreme weather events that would smash our cities, kill our citizens and turn farmland into desert. Indeed, the iconic image of global warming was this poster, from Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, exploiting the Hurricane Katrina catastrophe to whip up fear:

image

Read The Inconvenient Truth Here.

How many warming scaremongers whipped up the fear of mega droughts and savage storms?



Now for the chill pill.

It was embarrassing enough for the IPCC in the summary released last Friday to admit there has been a 15-year pause or dramatic slowdown in global warming, and that its climate models didn’t predict that or the increase in Antarctic sea ice.

But now the IPCC can’t be sure at all we’re suffering from many extreme weather events, either. It even admits its past warnings of more droughts were “overstated”.

On the hail that frightened Garnaut into demanding a steel roof:

In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems.

On droughts:

In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century, due to lack of direct observations, geographical inconsistencies in the trends, and dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice. Based on updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated. However, it is likely that the frequency and intensity of drought has increased in the Mediterranean and West Africa and decreased in central North America and north-west Australia since 1950.

On heatwaves:


Table 2.13 shows that there has been a likely increasing trend in the frequency of heatwaves since the middle of the 20th century in Europe and Australia and across much of Asia where there are sufficient data. However confidence on a global scale is medium due to lack of studies over Africa and South America but also in part due to differences in trends depending on how heatwaves are defined (Perkins et al., 2012).

This combined with issues with defining events, leads to the assessment thatthere is medium confidence that globally the length and frequency of warm spells, including heat waves, has increased since the middle of the 20th century although it is likely that heatwave frequency has increased during this period in large parts of Europe, Asia and Australia.

On heavy rain events:

In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.

On cyclones and storms:

In summary, this assessment does not revise the SREX conclusion of low confidence that any reported long-term (centennial) increases in tropical cyclone activity are robust, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities…

In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low. There is also low confidence for a clear trend in storminess proxies over the last century due to inconsistencies between studies or lack of long-term data in some parts of the world (particularly in the SH).  Likewise, confidence in trends in extreme winds is low, due to quality and consistency issues with analysed data…

Over periods of a century or more, evidence suggests slight decreases in the frequency of tropical cyclones making landfall in the North Atlantic and the South Pacific, once uncertainties in observing methods have been considered. Little evidence exists of any longer-term trend in other ocean basins… Several studies suggest an increase in intensity, but data sampling issues hamper these assessments…

Callaghan and Power (2011) find a statistically significant decrease in Eastern Australia land-falling tropical cyclones since the late 19th century although including 2010/2011 season data this trend becomes non-significant (i.e., a trend of zero lies just inside the 90% confidence interval).

On the trouble with detecting trends in extreme weather events:

Changes in extremes for other climate variables are generally less coherent than those observed for temperature, due to data limitations and inconsistencies between studies, regions and/or seasons. However, increases in precipitation extremes, for example, are consistent with a warmer climate. Analyses of land areas with sufficient data indicate increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events in recent decades, but results vary strongly between regions and seasons. For instance, evidence is most compelling for increases in heavy precipitation in North America, Central America and Europe, but in some other regions—such as southern Australia and western Asia—there is evidence of decreases. Likewise, drought studies do not agree on the sign of the global trend, with regional inconsistencies in trends also dependent on how droughts are defined. However, indications exist that droughts have increased in some regions (e.g., the Mediterranean) and decreased in others
(e.g., central North America) since the middle of the 20th century.

Remember, all these quotes come not from sceptics but from the IPCC, the United Nations body most responsible for spreading panic about global warming – and the body with a strong vested interest in keeping that panic alive.

This report should have had the words “Sorry we scared you” printed in big letters on the cover.  No steel roofs are required, after all. The future is not catastrophic. The fear-mongers must now be held to account.

UPDATE

The full IPCC report also makes much clearer than did the sanitised summary released on Friday that the computer models used to predict our climate are so flawed that they couldn’t even predict the last 15 years of essentially no warming. The IPCC admits they probably exaggerated the effect of man’s emissions on temperatures.

So why on earth should we trust them?

UPDATE

A separate posting on one of the IPCC authors, written by a reader, has been deleted. Several readers thought it unfair, and on reflection I am not sure it isn’t.

From the report:

(c) Model Response Error

The discrepancy between simulated and observed GMST trends during 1998–2012 could be explained in part by a tendency for some CMIP5 models to simulate stronger warming in response to increases in greenhouse-gas concentration than is consistent with observations… This finding provides evidence that some CMIP5 models show a larger response to greenhouse gases and other anthropogenic factors (dominated by the effects of aerosols) than the real world (medium confidence). As a consequence, it is argued in Chapter 11 that near-term model projections of GMST increase should be scaled down by about 10% (Section 11.3.6.3). This downward scaling is, however, not sufficient to explain the model-mean overestimate of GMST trend over the hiatus period.

Another possible source of model error is the poor representation of water vapour in the upper atmosphere… However, this effect is assessed here to be small, because there was a recovery in stratospheric water vapour after 2005…

In summary, the observed recent warming hiatus, defined as the reduction in GMST trend during 1998–2012 as compared to the trend during 1951–2012, is attributable in roughly equal measure to a cooling contribution from internal variability and a reduced trend in external forcing (expert judgment, medium confidence). The forcing trend reduction is primarily due to a negative forcing trend from both volcanic eruptions and the downward phase of the solar cycle. However, there is low confidence in quantifying the role of forcing trend in causing the hiatus, because of uncertainty in the magnitude of the volcanic forcing trend and low confidence in the aerosol forcing trend.

Almost all CMIP5 historical simulations do not reproduce the observed recent warming hiatus.

(My emboldening throughout.)

•••

To finish, this comment from Ross McKitrick (environmental economist who famously debunked the infamous hockey-stick graph that catapulted the ‘Global Warming’ scare onto the world stage) sums up nicely the IPCC’s latest junk science report :

Posted on : Reactions to IPCC AR5 Summary for Policy Makers | Watts Up With That?

Ross McKitrick says:

SPM in a nutshell: Since we started in 1990 we were right about the Arctic, wrong about the Antarctic, wrong about the tropical troposphere, wrong about the surface, wrong about hurricanes, wrong about the Himalayas, wrong about sensitivity, clueless on clouds and useless on regional trends. And on that basis we’re 95% confident we’re right.

•••

UPDATE

via Real Science

Shock News : Big Government Money Is Corrupting Climate Science

Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth And Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Tech, says the IPCC is taking a huge credibility hit over the hiatus – and its pronouncement that it is 95 percent certain that human activity is responsible for most global warming.

“I’m not happy with the IPCC,” she told Fox News. “I think it has torqued the science in an unfortunate direction.”

That torquing, she suggests, is because the money in climate science (the funding, that is) is tied to embellishing the IPCC narrative, especially the impacts of global warming. She is critical of the IPCC’s leadership as well, in particular its chairman, Rajendra Pachauri.

“They have explicit policy agendas,” Curry told Fox News. “Their proclamations are very alarmist and very imperative as to what we should be doing. And this does not inspire confidence in the final product.”

UN’s massive new climate report adds little explanation for ‘pause’ in warming | Fox News

•••

Related Articles :

Climatism Links :