The New Strategy Is Getting Clear

Real Science

The team now lies about every weather event, calls it the worst ever, and the press exaggerates it even further.

View original post


How to Cure a Climate Change Denier


Claim : Unprecedented Australian Bushfires

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 only way to get our society to truly change is to
frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe
.”
– emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

 •••

1381645_453192031464012_1527958218_n

Climate change ambulance chasers are furiously promoting the NSW fires as “unprecedented” and evidence of global warming (aka climate change) that actually paused 15 years ago.

Last summer might have been the hottest in Australia as measured by the Bureau of Meteorology, but satellite measurements monitored by the UAH, show nothing out of the ordinary at all :

BbAkwzvCAAAm6d-

Although not a “Global” anomaly, there has also been no temperature change in the Blue Mountains since records began, with exception to the 1930’s being the hottest decade on record.

•••

Unprecedented Fires in NSW for this time of the year?

September : Trove holds 74,067 media records of September fires in Sydney, dating back to 1815 …

Screen shot 2013-10-29 at 7.03.56 AM

Screen shot 2013-10-29 at 7.05.49 AM

Search results for ‘Sydney Bush Fires September’ – Digitised newspapers and more – Trove

October : 79,388 media records of October fires in Sydney, including news on Tuesday 29 October 1872 that “An extensive bush fire has raged since yesterday in the suburbs near Bondi…”!

Screen shot 2013-10-29 at 7.11.00 AM

Search results for ‘Sydney Bush Fires October’ – Digitised newspapers and more – Trove

 

SERIOUS FIRES IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Sydney, 17th October 1890

Tremendous bush fires are raging at Lismore, an agricultural district situated on the north arm of the Richmond River, about 530 miles north of Sydney. Vast tracts of territory has been devastated, and the township of Clunes is in danger. The inhabitants of the last-mentioned place are out fighting the flames.

SERIOUS BUSH FIRES
SYDNEY, 16th October. 1923

As a result of the drought serious bush fires are raging in the Upper Richmond district of New South Wales, menacing large areas of timber and grass

TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION CUT OFF.
14th October 1926 

SYDNEY, This Day. Huge bush fires are reported in the northern part of the State. The whole country from the Queensland border to Tabulam,, across the Tooloo Range, is ablaze. Unconfirmed reports state that some houses were burnt. All telegraphic communication is cut off. There has been little rain for months, and the country is exceedingly dry.

DAMAGE IN NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY, 15th October. 1926

Bush fires are still racing on the north coast, and, fanned by a gale, are travelling at a remarkable rate. Thousands of acres of valuable forest, country have been devastated, many homesteads destroyed, and much fine dairying country swept.

BLACK SUNDAY
A WILD STORM ENORMOUS DAMAGE IN N.S.W.
SYDNEY, 17th October. 1928 

This year summer heat has descended upon New South Wales unusually early. Already there have been several trying days, but the worst of these was last Sunday, when a high temperature of 95 degrees was accompanied by a cyclonic gale, which left behind it a trail of enormous damage.

BUSH FIRES IN N.S.W.
SYDNEY, October 15, 1944

Bush fires in New South Wales have destroyed thousands of acres of timber and pasture country. Prolonged drought conditions have caused the fires to spread rapidly. Already this month Sydney has had three days on which the temperature reached more than 90 degrees. High humidity has made conditions uncomfortable.

•••

The scale of the latest NSW fires ?

These fires were not bigger, earlier of deadlier than other Australian fires. Our biggest known bushfire “Black Thursday” burned out 5 million hectares in 1851, with Carbon Dioxide levels at 290 ppm. These NSW fires burned out 60,000, with CO² at 398 ppm.

The intensity of a fire has little link to global temperatures. Top fire experts such as Phil Cheney and David Packham, both former CSIRO bushfire researchers, believe far more relevant factors include fuel loads in the bush and fuel reduction management. Past rains are also highly relevant, adding to the fuel load.

rains that professional global warming alarmists like Tim Flannery claimed in 2007 would never again come, “Even the rain that falls will not actually fill our dams and river systems”. In 2009, the rains came down in a big way adding to the unprecedented and highly volatile 2013 fuel load.

•••

Enough boring sceptical facts…let’s hear what an icon of the left thinks about Australia and fires :

For 40 or maybe 60 millennia, Aboriginal peoples managed fire proactively, setting alight woodland, scrubland and grassland, so that they could pass freely, so that game was driven towards them, so that fresh green herbage was available. Aboriginal languages have dozens of words for fire. As the Endeavour sailed up the eastern coast, Captain Cook noted that the skies were darkened with smoke by day and lit up by fire at night.

In the national parks of Australia, the importance of regular burning is well understood. Elsewhere the emphasis has been on prevention. Attempting to prevent fire in most of Australia is simply postponing the inevitable. Bushland that is not burnt regularly turns into a powder keg, as the fuel load inexorably increases. When dry eucalypt woodland goes up, it explodes, turning into a veritable firestorm. If no wind is blowing, it creates its own wind.

The Australian governments, state and federal, are well aware of the cost of fire to the economy. People who want to build houses in sclerophyll woodland will be told that any space between the floor of the house and the ground must be sealed, and even that they have to clear the native vegetation for a radius of as much as 50 metres from the house walls. At the same time people in the most desirable seaside suburbs will be prevented by law from clearing native vegetation. Some of the most valuable real estate in Victoria is bordered by beachfront reserves that are an endless succession of thickets choked with tinder-dry dead wood.

The most disheartening aspect of the Kinglake disaster is that since its foundation in the 1880s the township has suffered regular bushfires, in 1926, in 1939, in the 1960s, in the Ash Wednesday fires of 1983; two years ago almost to the day 1,500 hectares were destroyed by fire, but nothing was learnt. The cause of these disasters is not global warming; still less is it arson. It is the failure to recognise that fire is an intrinsic feature of eucalypt bushland. It cannot be prevented but it can and should be managed. Unless there is a fundamental change of policy across all levels of government in Australia, there will be more and worse fires and more deaths.

Germaine Greer | Mark Riboldi

Salient, rational and measured words written in beautiful English by (activist, lefty, feminist) Germaine Greer ;p

•••

BW2JBhmCYAAEg89.jpg-large

•••

Dear climate change ambulance chasers,

Bushfire alarmism by the media, filtering down to the activist mob, serves a beneficial purpose in that it actually might save lives in terms of creating an ‘overheated’ alarmism, making people in affected areas more aware and potentially more prepared. But the alarmism must end there. The fires which were terrible, burnt out a relatively small area (in historical terms) of 60,000 hectares and were no bigger, earlier or deadlier than any other Australian fire throughout recorded history.

•••

UPDATE

Gerard Henderson:

According to Adam Bandt’s logic, the Greens are responsible for the devastating bushfires sweeping parts of NSW…

Bandt went on to suggest Abbott’s firefighting was a ‘’con’’ because he was ‘’helping start fires that put people’s lives in danger’’. In other words, the Prime Minister is not only a con artist but also an arsonist. Then, as if to prove when muck-racking the muck can go even lower, Bandt tweeted on Thursday, ‘’Tony Abbott’s plan means more bushfires for Australia’’.

Bandt’s attack overlooked two essential facts. First, the Coalition’s policy aim on the reduction of carbon emissions by 2020 is the same as that of the Labor Party (which the Greens were aligned to for most of the past three years).

Second, if the Greens had supported Kevin Rudd’s carbon pollution reduction scheme in 2009 and 2010, Australia would already have a form of an emissions trading scheme in place. Bob Brown, Christine Milne and their Greens colleagues in the Senate opposed Rudd Labor’s reduction scheme and prevented it passing into legislation.

Of course, if Australia had introduced Rudd’s scheme it would have done nothing to stop the bushfires. Australia’s carbon emissions are but a tiny fraction of world output. Moreover, the relationship between climate change and extreme weather events remains uncertain.

•••

UPDATE

via JoanneNova

A few facts on Flannery, Climate Council, and prophecies of bushfire: no long trends for Katoomba

Flannery and the Climate Council are at it again — trying to scare money out of people with their prophecies of bushfires. They are milking the fear factor from the October fires in the Blue Mountains, telling us disaster planning means we have to get “the facts straight”.

Let’s get the facts straight on exactly how human emissions of CO2 have affected the temperature and rainfall in the Blue Mountains of New South Wales. How much hotter and drier is the climate? Ninety percent of human emissions have been produced since WWII. Katoomba has the longest running temperature series I could find in the BOM records -see below. But where is that rising trend? The string of hot years in the late 1930s appears to be just as hot as the last decade.  The 1920s and 30s look a lot like the 1980 and 90s.

katoomba-temperature-october

The facts about Katoomba annual temperatures

Source: Katoomba annual mean temperature

see also Katoomba October mean temperatures

But wait, the Climate Council tells us “Hot, dry conditions create conditions favourable for bushfires. Australia has just experienced its hottest 12 months ever recorded.” Any sane person would assume the Blue Mountains must be getting drier –  strange the Climate Council don’t provide a graph on that. Let’s look at the drying climate in Katoomba.

katoomba-rainfall

 Source: Katoomba annual rainfall

See also the same trends in  Blackheath annual rainfall and Lithgow annual rainfall.

In other words Katoomba has a noisy annual rainfall, there is no obvious trend, there have been dry years and wet years, and if heat and dryness make fires worse, then there is no sign that CO2 makes any difference.

In Katoomba at least, the late 30s and 40s appear to be a bit hotter, and also drier than the last few years. That was when CO2 levels were ideal. Continue Reading »

•••

See also :

Climatism related :


As Temperatures Have Declined, The IPCC Has Gained Confidence In Catastrophic Warming

Real Science

With each successive decline in temperature, the IPCC has gained confidence that their exponentially increasing warming models are correct.

ScreenHunter_1013 Sep. 28 00.13

Note that the linear decline seen since TAR in 2001 is almost a perfect fit for the exponential increase of 0.4ºC predicted by Hansen during that interval.

ScreenHunter_968 Sep. 26 16.46

The next graph is a closeup showing actual temperatures since 2001, overlaid on Hansen’s forecasts.

ScreenHunter_1019 Sep. 28 07.14

Bottom line is that you would have to have the IQ of a turnip to believe any of the spectacularly transparent lies being spewed by the IPCC this week.

View original post


Peer into the Heart of the IPCC, Find Greenpeace

Climate Change will result in a catastrophic global sea level
rise of seven meters. That’s bye-bye most of Bangladesh,
Netherlands, Florida and would make London the new Atlantis
.”
– Greenpeace International

It doesn’t matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true
.”
– Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace

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

•••

Via NoFrakkingConsensus

Peer into the Heart of the IPCC, Find Greenpeace

March 14, 2011 at 5:20 pm

Many environmental organizations employ people whose sole purpose is to raise awareness about global warming. The more effective they are at convincing the public there’s an urgent problem, the more money these organizations receive in donations.

Activists are therefore the furthest thing from neutral parties. They have a right to participate in discussions about climate change, but we all need to understand that when they do so they are advancing an agenda.

Since agendas and science don’t mix, environmentalists should keep their distance from activities that are supposed to be scientific. Their mere presence undermines the integrity of the research. It casts a shadow over the data and calls into question the conclusions.

But activists have not kept their distance from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) even though this body claims to be a scientific organization. Nor has the IPCC taken steps to safeguard its reputation by keeping a strict separation between itself and green groups.

This is perhaps best illustrated by a Greenpeace climate change publication that appeared in early 2007. The foreword to this document, which focused on New Zealand, was written by none other than Rajendra Pachauri. At the end of his remarks, beside his photograph, he is identified not as a private individual expressing private opinions but as the chairman of the IPCC.

I’ve mentioned previously that the fact that Richard Klein worked as a Greenpeace campaigner at age 23 was no impediment to the IPCC appointing him a lead author at age 25. I’ve also drawn attention to the fact that some of those who’ve served as IPCC expert reviewers are actually Greenpeace employees.

But the cozy relationship doesn’t end there. Bill Hare has been a Greenpeace spokesperson since 1992. By 2000 he was climate policy director for Greenpeace International. According to various Greenpeace blog posts he is “a legend” in that organization, served as its chief climate negotiator in 2007, and remains a chief policy advisor. Yet none of this has prevented him from being nominated – and chosen – to fill senior IPCC roles.

In 2000 policy director Hare served as an expert reviewer for an influential IPCC emissions scenarios document. When the 2007 edition of the climate bible was released, we learned that he’d served as a lead author, that he’d been an expert reviewer for 2 out of 3 sections of the report (see here and here), and that he was one of a select group of only 40 people who comprised the “core writing team” for the important Synthesis Report.

Hare has once again been appointed a lead author for the upcoming version of the climate bible, expected to be released in 2013 (see p. 8 of this 27-page PDF). Keep Reading »

 

VIDEO: Canadian investigative journalist Donna Laframboise speaks to IPA members in Melbourne about the flaws she has discovered in IPCC reports.

http://www.ipa.org.au

UPDATE

Via NoFrakkingConsensus

WWF’s Chief Spokesperson Joins IPCC

April 25, 2011 at 7:09 pm

UPDATE 7 Jan. 2013: Morgan’s online bio has changed since this blog post was written. It no longer contains the key clause: “acting as chief spokesperson for the organization on climate change.” The old version of her bio has been backed up here. A screencap may be seen here.

My upcoming book has a section titled Why We Can’t Trust AR5. The last major Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report was published in 2007. It’s known as the Fourth Assessment Report – or AR4 for short.

The latest edition, AR5, is expected to completed in 2013. Its personnel were announced by the IPCC last June. By then that organization had already been wounded by the Himalayan glacier scandal, which involved faulty information published in a World Wildlife Fund (WWF) document. A few critics had also, by that time, shone light on the IPCC’s not infrequent use of literature produced by organizations such as the WWF and Greenpeace.

But the IPCC, it has been observed, is a slow learner. If this were not the case there’s no way it would have appointed Jennifer Morgan as an AR5 review editor.

According to its marketing department, the IPCC is a scientific body that writes scientific reports. If that were strictly true, it’s unclear why AR5 is going to devote an entire chapter to International Cooperation: Agreements and Instruments.

for source document, click image & see p. 26 of the 27-page PDF

According to IPCC mythology, those involved in this historic report-writing exercise are the world’s top scientists and best experts. Morgan is a perfect example of how this is utter nonsense. For several years she was the WWF’s chief spokesperson on climate change. She led its Global Climate Change Program and headed its delegation to the Kyoto Protocol negotiations.

Prior to that, Morgan worked for the Climate Action Network (according to her online bio, it’s a collection “of over 200 environmental groups worldwide with eight regional offices”). Currently she’s employed by the World Resources Institute (Al Gore is on its board). In other words, Morgan is not one of the world finest scientific minds. She is a professional activist.

As recently as 10 months ago the IPCC recruited her to help prepare a report that is supposed to be objective, rigorous, and balanced. If previous media coverage is anything to judge by, once it’s released we’ll all be told this report should be considered Holy Writ since “this is what the world’s scientific community thinks”.

Honestly, these people have no shame.

•••

UPDATE

Screen Shot 2014-01-19 at , January 19, 8.06.25 am

Climate Change: what do we know about the IPCC?

Mike Hulme and Martin Mahony
School of Environmental Sciences
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ

Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others   in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies

Continue Reading »

IPCC Insider Says That The 97% Consensus Actually Consists Of “A Few Dozen” | CACA

•••

UPDATE

MUST MUST SEE VIDEO »

Laframboise and Topher ~ two superb communicators discuss the scandalous truth about the UN’s IPCC. If nothing else in the climate debate has shocked you, the information in this video most definitely will.

50 to 1 VIDEO PROJECT – Topher interviews Donna Laframboise, former journalist turned investigative author. Donna has critiqued the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s claims about itself, its authors and its peer review process, and found them very VERY wanting…

•••

UPDATE

via Real Science

Shock News : IPCC Publishes Stupid Alarmist C**p They Found On The Internet

Posted on September 24, 2013 by 

Debate heats up over IPCC melting glaciers claim

Glaciologists are this week arguing over how a highly contentious claim about the speed at which glaciers are melting came to be included in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

In 1999 New Scientist reported a comment by the leading Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, who said in an email interview with this author that all the glaciers in the central and eastern Himalayas could disappear by 2035.

Hasnain, of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, who was then chairman of the International Commission on Snow and Ice’s working group on Himalayan glaciology, has never repeated the prediction in a peer-reviewed journal. He now says the comment was “speculative”.

Despite the 10-year-old New Scientist report being the only source, the claim found its way into the IPCC fourth assessment report published in 2007. Moreover the claim was extrapolated to include all glaciers in the Himalayas.

Debate heats up over IPCC melting glaciers claim – environment – 08 January 2010 – New Scientist

James Delingpole explains the IPCC methodology :

So, to recap: in the course of a garbled phone conversation a scientist accidentally invents a problem that doesn’t exist. This gets reported as if gospel in an influential Warmist science magazine and repeated by a Warmist NGO, before being lent the full authority of the IPCC’s fourth assessment report which, as we know, can’t be wrong because it is vetted by around 2,500 scientists. Then, on the back of this untrue story, the scientist gets a cushy job at the institution whose director is also in charge of the IPCC.

Syed Hasnain, RK Pachauri and the mystery of the non-disappearing glaciers – Telegraph Blogs

UPDATE

via Real Science

I’m 100% Sure That The IPCC Is Lying

Drafts seen by Reuters of the study by the UN panel of experts, due to be published next month, say it is at least 95 percent likely that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s. That is up from at least 90 percent in the last report in 2007, 66 percent in 2001, and just over 50 in 1995, steadily squeezing out the arguments by a small minority of scientists that natural variations in the climate might be to blame.

Experts surer of manmade global warming but local predictions elusive – World – DNA

They are so sure, that Kevin Trenberth sent this letter out :

Selection_006

They can’t explain the lack of warming, but they are 95% sure that the warming they aren’t seeing is caused by man.

James Hansen wrote this in 1999.

in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases — in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Whither U.S. Climate?

h/t to Tom Nelson and Marc Morano

•••

UPDATE

UPDATE

UPDATE

Must See YouTube – The Bias Of The IPCC

•••

United Nations and IPCC Related :

See also: