There is No Climate Emergency: World Climate Declaration By James Reed
Here is a reference to the World Climate Declaration, made by 1,100 scientists and professionals, who have stated that there is no climate emergency. Warming is, if it is occurring at all, much slower than the IPCC claims, and present climatic models face numerous problems. The popular Leftist notion that there is 10 years to save the planet (made year after year), is just fear mongering, which seems to have worn very thin, hence the need for Covid and monkeypox to strike home at a more personal level.
https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/WCD-version-06272215121.pdf
https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/
“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of over 1100 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
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 significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world 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 is 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. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.
Epilogue
The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world*. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.
From now onward the group is going to function as “Global Climate Intelligence Group”. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.”
* It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts
https://www.clarkcountytoday.com/news/1200-scientists-scholars-there-is-no-climate-emergency/
“Led by a Nobel Prize laureate, more than 1,100 scientists and scholars have signed a document declaring climate science is based more on personal beliefs and political agendas than sound, rigorous science.
The World Climate Declaration states climate science “should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific.”
“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures,” the declaration reads.
The declaration was organized by Climate Intelligence, an independent policy foundation founded in 2019 by Dutch emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and Dutch science journalist Marcel Crok.
The U.K. website the Daily Sceptic reported one of the lead authors of the declaration, atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd.” Yet relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists has generated a widely accepted narrative that the science is “settled.”
“We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” the WCD states. “”In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”
Last week, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which spends $368 billion for “green” energy with the aim of reducing CO2 emissions by 40% by 2030. When Joe Biden was vice president under Barack Obama, the administration subsidized “green” energy with federal grants and tax breaks. Joe Biden himself announced in 2009 a $535 million loan guarantee for the solar panel company Solyndra to go along with $700 million in venture capital funding. Biden said the plant built with that money would power more than half a million homes. But two years later, the company filed for bankruptcy and shut down its operations.
The World Climate Declaration points out that since emerging from the Little Ice Age in the mid-19th century, the world has warmed significantly less than predicted by the U.N.’s International Panel on Climate Change’s models
“The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change,” the WCD states.
The declaration argues Earth’s climate has varied, with cold and warm periods, for as long as the planet has existed, and it is “no surprise that we are experiencing a period of warming.”
The climate models “are not remotely plausible as global policy tools,” ignoring, for one, the benefits of carbon dioxide, which is “not a pollutant.”
“It is essential to all life on Earth,” the declaration says. “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 yield of crops worldwide.”
There is no statistical evidence, the signatories say, “that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and such-like natural disasters, or making them more frequent.”
“There is no climate emergency. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”
Last year, Steven Koonin, an under-secretary of science in the Obama administration, published a book titled “Unsettled” that said “the science is insufficient to make useful projections about how the climate will change over the coming decades, much less what our actions will be.”
The idea that climate change is settled demeans and chills the scientific enterprise, he contended, “retarding its progress in these important matters.”
In 2020, the long-time green activist Michael Shellenberger wrote a book called “Apocalypse Never” that lamented the conversation about climate change has “spiralled out of control.””
Comments