Archive for the ‘Climate Change Commentary’ Category
Lord Christopher Monckton on Global Warming Hoax
Monday, October 19th, 2009Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Climate Change: We have just four months. Four months to secure the future of our planet.
Thursday, August 13th, 2009Remarks to the Global Environment Forum
Honourable Ahn Sang-Soo, Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City,Honourable Mr. Ko Kun, Co-Chairman of the global Enviroment Forum,
Honourable Mr. Lee Man-yi, Minister of Environment,
Distinguished guests, Ladies and gentlemen, Dear Friends,
It is a great privilege for me to participate in this global Environment Forum.
Let me begin by offering my sincere congratulations to Mayor Ahn and the the citizens of the Metropolitan City of Incheon.
Environment Forum as well as the Global Fair and Festival 2009, you show true global vision ? vision that underlines the importance of local government and cities in coping with the challenges of the 21st century.
Ladies and gentlemen,
As you know, Incheon is famous as the gateway to Korea.
But here today, I am especially proud as UN Secretary-General – and a Korean citizen – to be able to say that Incheon is also a gateway to our common future.
The very fact that this most important Forum meets here today testifies to that.
The Songdo Convensia is one of the world’s most green convention centres. And it is located in one of the world’s most eco-friendly cities.
Songdo is remarkable not only for what it has become but for what it used to be.
People who grew up here remember the smokestacks and toxic fumes.
In a few short decades, these have given way to clean buildings and clear skies.
We are here today to recognize the connections between us and deal with a common problem. Of this, too, Songdo is a symbol and key.
I understand that Songdo modeled itself on the Swedish sister city of Hammarby Sjostad (SCHÖ-stad).
That city, too, used to be an industrial site before it transformed itself through ecofriendly development.
These two cities – one in Europe, the other in Asia – show visionary civic leadership. They understand that we have a choice: adapt or perish.
full text here
Doomed Planet: ETS Forum – The models are wrong
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009by William Kininmonth
Quadrant Online
August 8, 2009
In computer models we trust!
The coming Senate vote on the badly misnamed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) is the culmination of intense propaganda spanning more than three decades. The Senate Bill aims at restricting emissions of carbon dioxide, a colourless, odourless gas essential to life, and has nought to do with smokestack carbon particles and other pollutants that have been regulated since the 1950s. The basis of the Bill is an unsustainable hypothesis that dangerous global warming will be an outcome of continued burning of fossil fuels and the rising concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
It is nearly 20 years since the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC) in 1990 gave its first assessment of the likelihood and potential magnitude of human-caused global warming. In their first report in 1990 they confirmed that humans would have an impact on global temperatures as carbon dioxide levels increased. Importantly, the magnitudes of impacts were considered conjectural and subject to large uncertainty, because computer models of the time were rudimentary in their ability to represent the complex processes in the climate system.
The IPCC’s second report in 1995 was more confident, saying that the balance of evidence suggested a discernible human influence on global climate. By the time of the 2001 third report the IPCC was concluding that the ability of computer models to project future climate had increased and ‘the warming over the past 100 years is very unlikely to be due to internal variability alone, as estimated by current [computer] models’.
In its most recent 2007 report the IPCC has gone so far as to claim that most of the warming of the last half century was very likely due to human activities, especially the emissions of carbon dioxide. Moreover it was claimed that unconstrained emissions of carbon dioxide would lead to a dangerous global temperature rise of between 2oC and 6oC by the end of the century.
Unfortunately the more recent pattern of global temperature does not fit the IPCC scenario. Carbon dioxide levels have continued to rise but global temperatures have flat-lined since 1997.
full text here
Earth Day, Then and Now
Friday, July 31st, 2009The planet’s future has never looked better. Here’s why.
Ronald Bailey
reasononline.com
May 2000
Thirty Years ago, 20 million Americans participated in the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970. Fifth Avenue in New York City was closed to automobiles as 100,000 people joined in concerts, lectures, and street theater. More than 2,000 colleges and universities across America paused their anti-war protests to rally instead against pollution and population growth. Even Congress recessed, acknowledging that the environment was now on a political par with motherhood. Since that first Earth Day, the celebrations have only gotten bigger, if somewhat less dramatic: The organizers of Earth Day 2000, to be held April 22, expect 500 million people around the globe to participate in celebrations, workshops, and demonstrations. This year’s theme is “clean energy” and the master of ceremonies for the big celebration on the Washington Mall is none other than Leonardo Di Caprio.
The first Earth Day was the brainchild of Gaylord Nelson, the Democratic senator from Wisconsin. The moment was obviously ripe. Nelson had proposed a national “teach-in” on the environment in September 1969 and only eight months later, everything was in place for the single largest national demonstration in American history. Dramatic events such as the Cuyahoga River bursting into flame in 1969, the blowout of an oil well off Santa Barbara, and the “death” of Lake Erie due to pollution all fed Americans’ concerns. The sorry state of America’s environment hit home for me when, as a 16-year-old high school student from the mountains of Virginia, I visited George Washington’s home, Mt. Vernon, on a marching band trip. Bobbing in the nearby Potomac was a sign warning visitors not to come in contact with the water.
Earth Day 1970 provoked a torrent of apocalyptic predictions. “We have about five more years at the outside to do something,” ecologist Kenneth Watt declared to a Swarthmore College audience on April 19, 1970. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment. The day after Earth Day, even the staid New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” Very Apocalypse Now.
full text here
Climategate: the scandal spreads, the plot thickens, the shame deepens…
Friday, November 27th, 2009telegraph.co.uk
November 2009
Wow! The scandal just gets juicier and juicier. Now it seems that the Kiwis may have been at it too – tinkering with raw data to make “Global Warming” look scarier than it really is. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That; Ian Wishart)
The alleged villains this time are the climate scientists at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NiWA) – New Zealand’s answer to Britain’s Climate Research Unit. And to judge by this news alert by the Climate Science Coalition of NZ, both institutions share a similarly laissez-faire attitude to scientific accuracy.
Compare and contrast these two graphs and you’ll see .
This is the graph from NiWA’s website, showing mean annual temperature over New Zealand from 1853. Note the dotted straight line showing the upward trend. Worrying, isn’t it? Almost enough to make you fall in love your flickery, yellowy new eco-light bulbs, recycle your kids and commit yourself to a binding agreement at Copenhagen.
Now have a look at this analysis of the raw data taken from exactly the same temperature stations.
Can you see the difference? I can – and I know as little about science as Al Gore. But lets allow the experts at Climate Science Coalition of NZ to explain:
full text here
Posted in Climate Change Commentary, Global Warming | No Comments »