| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Climate chaos? Don't believe it |
| 2006-11-05 |
| Lotsa scientific facts and skullduggery by the Academic grant-parasites By Christopher Monckton Last week, Gordon Brown and his chief economist both said global warming was the worst "market failure" ever. That loaded soundbite suggests that the "climate-change" scare is less about saving the planet than, in Jacques Chirac's chilling phrase, "creating world government". This week and next, I'll reveal how politicians, scientists and bureaucrats contrived a threat of Biblical floods, droughts, plagues, and extinctions worthier of St John the Divine than of science. Sir Nicholas Stern's report on the economics of climate change, which was published last week, says that the debate is over. It isn't. There are more greenhouse gases in the air than there were, so the world should warm a bit, but that's as far as the "consensus" goes. After the recent hysteria, you may not find the truth easy to believe. So you can find all my references and detailed calculations here. The Royal Society says there's a worldwide scientific consensus. It brands Apocalypse-deniers as paid lackeys of coal and oil corporations. I declare my interest: I once took the taxpayer's shilling and advised Margaret Thatcher, FRS, on scientific scams and scares. Alas, not a red cent from Exxon. |
| Posted by:Frank G |
| #3 Actually, the science is even dodgier. Were the feedbacks mentioned, and necessary to get any warming over half a degree, to exist they would certainly been triggered in the past when temperatures were higher than today resulting in the runaway warming the models predict. We know for certain that the earth's temperature has never been more than a couple of degrees warmer than today (going back millions of years). Ergo, these feedbacks do not exist or if they do exist they are not capable of causing significant additional warming. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-11-05 22:30 |
| #2 "The bigger the value of lambda, the bigger the temperature increase the UN could predict. Using poor Ludwig Boltzmann's law, lambda's true value is just 0.22-0.3C per watt. In 2001, the UN effectively repealed the law, doubling lambda to 0.5C per watt. A recent paper by James Hansen says lambda should be 0.67, 0.75 or 1C: take your pick. Sir John Houghton, who chaired the UN's scientific assessment working group until recently, tells me it now puts lambda at 0.8C: that's 3C for a 3.7-watt doubling of airborne CO2. Most of the UN's computer models have used 1C. Stern implies 1.9C." Unbelievable. Criminal even, to the extent that public funds are spent on this deceit. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-11-05 19:55 |
| #1 "It brands Apocalypse-deniers as paid lackeys of coal and oil corporations." No, I'm not. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-11-05 19:49 |