Constructive Environmentalism CFACT Style

Many years ago, when I was working for an environmental information department at a large company, I was intrigued to discover that a colleague, putting together a data base with information sources, had created a sub category called “Anti Environmental Groups”. At a closer look, this turned out to be a listing of think tanks with a scientific, free market oriented approach to environmental issues (no doubt CFACT would have been on the list, had she found us). She claimed she couldn’t come up with any alternative name. Should be added that she was a very skilled and reasonable working mate, but apparently tricked by the mainstream propaganda in those days. As the main listing included both WWF and Greenpeace, a better division could have been between reasonable, militant and violent groups. No such luck.

The history and rhetorics of the radical green movement is not a sunny one, sometimes just ridiculous, on occasion rather sound. More often downright scary.

Peter C. Glovergoes through some of the often forgotten rethoric on the barricade, in a splendid article in The Commentator.

You should read thew article in full, but let me pick a few central passages and quotations:

Journalist Alex Lockwood (in the leftwing UK Guardian) proposes “the internet should be nationalised as a public utility in order to contain the superfluous claims of warming skeptics”. Fred Pearce (again in the UK Guardian) demands we “silence the doubters”. At the 2007 Live Earth concert, Robert F. Kennedy Jnr called for skeptics to be “treated as traitors” following this up with the demand that all coal execs “should be in jail for all eternity”.

(—)

Alarmist high priest James Hansen has called for skeptics to be put on trial for “high crimes against humanity”.  Hansen has also endorsed a book by Keith Farnish that advocates sabotage and environmental terrorism by blowing up dams and demolishing cities to return us to an agrarian age.

(—)

Kari Norgaard is professor of climate change at the University of Oregon. At a recent London conference she called

for skeptics to be viewed as “racists” and climate scepticism as a “sickness” needing to be “treated.

If I may pitch in, couldn’t we agree that environment is about what’s around us. Our living conditions. These, in my humble opinion, not only include, but are based on things like private property and common decency.

QED, mild winter is over. Freezing cold and snow falling on Oslo and Strasbourg, as well as – last time I checked – Athens.

Weather should not be confused with climate cycles, but observations are necessary to make scientific assessments. As even the IPCC has now admitted that there has not been any global warming for quite a while, it’s time to really change focus. No time for alarmism, but to stop the expensive CO2 hysteria. David Rose makes some important observations in The Daily Mail:

“Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Solar output goes through 11-year cycles, with high numbers of sunspots seen at their peak.

We are now at what should be the peak of what scientists call ‘Cycle 24’ – which is why last week’s solar storm resulted in sightings of the aurora borealis further south than usual. But sunspot numbers are running at less than half those seen during cycle peaks in the 20th Century.

Analysis by experts at NASA and the University of Arizona – derived from magnetic-field measurements 120,000 miles beneath the sun’s surface – suggest that Cycle 25, whose peak is due in 2022, will be a great deal weaker still.”

Happy Valentine’s!

To no surprise, the real winter cold enfolded most of Europe. Again.

In parts of Europe, people have died. Travelling is out of the question, as trains are stranded and the roads are dangerous. How comforting then to be able to enjoy the heating at home, cook  up a warm soup, or even venture outside in solid armour, buy a paper around the corner and escape into an even cosier corner with a hot drink.

That’s because, regardless of the extreme weather, where I am, energy works. In many places it doesn’t. As half of the nuclear plants here are down, rivers frozen and – quite naturally – all windmills are standing still, it’s a blessing to be able to, at least partly, trust that different forms of energy will somehow find their way into my hide out.

A private energy market is simply a necessity on days like this.

However, be careful not to let someone else pick up that tab. To my surprise, EU Comissioner Hedegaard has issued a warning against the general enthusiasm over bio fuels. Reports Euractiv:

A draft Commission impact assessment, obtained by EurActiv last week, indicates that the greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels such as palm oil, soybean and rapeseed may exceed those of fossil fuels when wider factors are considered.

This is because tropical forests and wetlands are often cleared to compensate for lands taken to grow biofuels elsewhere, a process known as indirect land use change, or ILUC.

“Personally, I’ve always been very cautious on biofuels,” Hedegaard told EurActiv in an interview. “It’s great to see the potential in new technologies, but we should take very much care in Europe that we are now not establishing a new big industry that we then – after some time – say, wow, that was not so good.”

Well worth considering in our cosy corners.

Denmark, taking over the rotating EU presidency has outlined its priorities for the next half year. Not surprising, really, but still awkward.

Reports Euractiv:

“Environment Minister Ida Auken called for making energy efficiency legally binding, dismissing concerns that weak economies and the eurozone debt crisis would trump the environment in EU policy debates in the months ahead.

‘It’s not enough to be focusing on the financial crisis right now, and then not look at just as important or just as severe a crisis – namely the environmental crisis,’she said at a briefing 12 days before the country’s EU presidency begins. ‘We have all possibilities to keep the environment on the agenda despite the hard times on the economic front.”

It might of course be that also the financial crisis is better handled with as little political intervention as possible, but remember COP 15 in Copenhagen. The presiding country at that time, Sweden, declared it the absolutely most important event during the period, in spite of having to handle the Lisbon treaty, and the host country, Denmark put loads of prestige on the table. Do I need to remind you that all agree it was an – expensive – fiasco.

Energy efficiency is better driven by market forces, in spite of the standard charades in Brussels. As for climate policy, admit that it’s just down to shuffling money in a loop none can get out of.

Meanwhile, Castro on Cuba has also declared his priorities for the next year: Prevent nuclear war and protect the environment.

Rather courageous for a dictatorial family that once drew the world closer than ever before, or after, towards a global nuclear war and has spent half a century destroying the environment for its subjects by persecuting, imprisoning and starving them.

Sidewalks are slippery, with the newly arrived and thus unusual European winter. Traffic is as bad as every year and people are frantic to make last minute purchases.

Then comes another old tradition, with a new name. It used to be some mumbo jumbo about not exploiting something, now the young hooligans blocking traffic and shopping malls call it a Climate Action.

Could, in the midst of winter, these kids at least try to show some decency towards their fellow men and women, who are just out to – with or without wheelchair or crutches – risking their health in order to spend a nice holiday.

Grumpy? You bet. But, Yes, this is not a season for grumpiness. Please take my advice, go sit on Santa’s lap instead of harassing people. Who knows, we might even get peace, prosperity and a clear sky to contemplate on that star up above.

The fact that you didn’t make it in Durban does not give you the right to deny others to enjoy the pleasures of the season. Merry Decency to you all.

Wiser from the Copenhagen hysteria, all sides – except President Zuma, who is forced to show some enthusiasm, and in a way The Holy Father, who wants a “credible” outcome (nothing wrong with credibility) - seem to agree that COP17 in Durban wont accomplish anything. As for me, I’m content with that, but it’s still fun to watch the show, including side appaerances from all places. Guess we can look forward to a lot of that.

In the UK, PM Cameron’s “Green Guru”, Steve Hilton suddenly comes out as a realist, saying he doubts the entire Global Warming idea.

Reports the Daily Mail:

‘I’m not sure I believe in it,’ he announced at a meeting of the Energy Department, prompting one aide to blurt out: ‘Did I just hear that correctly?’

Meanwhile, Canada seems to abandon ship as far as Kyoto goes.

“[Environment Minister, Peter] Kent said in the House of Commons on Nov. 22 he won’t sign a document at the Durban conference that extends the Kyoto targets.

‘Canada goes to Durban with a number of countries sharing the same objective, and that is to put Kyoto behind us,’ Kent said.” according to CTV News.

And this is just the beginning. Roughly, on the table is: Kyoto, expiring next year. The EU, not having any problems with the obligations, are for an extension, and the big players never joined. A global binding treaty that was hoped for in Copenhagen and now, if ever, might appear at least as a draft resolution in three years.

Remains the 100 billions, pledged, but still unclear how, to be spread over the earth. This is COP17. Guess the by now professional summit globerotters find that a fair sum for others to pay, in order to continue the circus.

All the players are gearing up for the Durban festivities in a month. Though only accounting for about 11 percent of the worlds carbon emissions, the European Union, not surprisingly wants to play a major role.

Euractiv gives an update:

Click to play Methane Madness!

“Put a cork in it, Al!”

That’s the message students are sending Al Gore, radical climate campaigners and assorted other bohemians, grant-seekers and profiteers cashing in on the global warming craze.

Al Gore is calling on folks to make September 14th a day of climate action through a series of propaganda videos he will be broadcasting worldwide.  CFACT calls for a day of genuine “climate realism” instead. CFACT Collegians are spreading the word with a bit of online levity.

CFACT’s Methane Madness game trains online players to help “Pal Gore” control the climate by corking cows and watching them float away. Methane is more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas but less than 1% of atmospheric greenhouse gases come from cattle. Even so, radical climate campaigners call for shutting down our cattle and dairy industries along with much of the rest our economy. They’d like us to go vegan.

However, climate science IS NOT SETTLED; computer models are not all that; observations don’t fit the models; man’s impact on climate and atmosphere is dwarfed by nature’s; Climategate is just the tip of the corrupt science iceberg; more scientists find the courage to match their analysis every day and declare against the scare; offsets are a scam; alternative energy is inefficient; citizens can now spot warming propaganda; economies in crisis can’t afford the waste; carbon profiteers rake in tax dollars but don’t affect the climate; consensus is not science; there has never been a consensus; freedom and prosperity are the proven path to cleaner environments; our meat and dairy industries are home-based, thriving industries that feed multitudes and employ the nicest people you’ll ever meet; developed nations have enough to eat for the first time in history; etc; etc; etc; etc….

WHOA! All those dreary, inconvenient facts! Gore won’t enjoy those. As Scarlett O’Hara said, “I can’t think about that right now. If I do, I’ll go crazy. I’ll think about that tomorrow.”

If they succeed in corking all the cows, Methane Madness players can move on to further levels and put a cork in Gore and company’s hot air.

Don’t worry, CFACT’s always been about free speech. Corks come out. Gore and his celebrity buddies can go right back to spewing their hot air. It will take cold facts for realism to triumph over alarmism on climate. CFACT wouldn’t have it any other way.

“Jobs just aren’t waiting for us when we graduate the way they used to,” said Methane Madness player Josh Smith, a student at University of Wisconsin.  “Al Gore preaches we should live with less, while he flies from mansion to mansion.  I don’t even know how I’m going to pay my student loans.  Put a cork in it, Al!”

If levity’s not your bag, there’s always plenty of global warming facts and analysis debunking the scare here at www.CFACT.eu,  www.CFACT.org and at www.ClimateDepot.com.

Last Tuesday, University of Leipzig science faculty dean Prof. Dr. Jürgen Haase barred a climate seminar organized by (his own) geography professor Werner Kirstein, as well as the use of an auditorium of his own institute (!) and participation by European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) Vice President Michael Limburg as one of the the main speakers. Fortunately the ban was later relaxed and the seminar was allowed to go ahead.

The reason for originally having banned the seminar was a dissertation authored by Michael Limburg, which was critical of climate-science and was submitted to the faculty in March 2010. Two reviewers rejected the dissertation claiming, among other points, that it was inadequate. This is why Limburg was not welcome as a speaker, according to a letter from the Dean. The fact that the same dissertation had been recommended for acceptance by 4 other renowned professors went unmentioned by Haase. Limburg immediately challenged the ban.

What was so inconvenient about Limburg’s dissertation?

Under the supervision of Prof. Werner Kirstein, Limburg had written a dissertation that examined the quality of historical global temperature and sea level data in detail. His conclusions were damning. Using accepted rules for science and measurement, Limburg’s results showed that the datasets did not allow sea level and temperature change over the last 120-150 years to be determined anywhere near the alleged accuracies of millimetres or tenths of a degree Celsius respectively as claimed by the IPCC. The range of uncertainty, in both global mean temperature and sea level, is considerably greater than the total respective changes given by the IPCC. Every factor in attributing the possible causes of the changes was, at best, scientifically questionable.

Naturally, the faculty searched – and found – the “right” reviewers for assessing Limburg’s dissertation. In his decision to ban Limburg from speaking, Haase quoted only the objectively unfair and negative assessments. The fact that four other university professors had recommended the dissertation be accepted got no mention by Haase. Limburg officially contested the assessment delivered by the two reviewers, but they have taken their time to respond. Up to today there is still no response. Now a legal battle appears inevitable. Science has again been cast aside.

The high point of the whole affair is the open attempt by the University of Leipzig to silence Lim¬burg – even though he had been officially invited by a full professor. The Leipzig University faculty appears to be completely oblivious to this unworthy conduct.

Open debate is essential for the progress of science

This brings up Voltaire, the most famous philosopher of our time, and his words to his harshest opponent: ‘Sir, I do not agree with your opinion and I fully oppose you. But I would give up my life to assure that you will always be allowed to publicly express your opinion’. At the University of Leipzig, there has to be some colleagues among the philosophy faculty who are familiar with those words. But it looks as if the University leadership is not among them.

Sources: Press release by EIKE, www.eike-klima-energie.eu, originally translated from German by Pierre Gosselin, http://notrickszone.com

Climate science is anything but settled.

For years, physicist Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Institute (who has presented at conferences organized by CFACT and EIKE) has been asking inconvenient questions about the relationship between the sun, clouds and climate.  He demonstrated in the lab that cosmic rays from the sun affect cloud

Henrik Svensmark

formation.  Cosmic rays are a factor not meaningfully considered in the computer climate models which global warming proponents have declared to be so robust that they are beyond discussion.

To the vexation of true climate believers, Svensmark’s work has been confirmed at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research.  CERN is home to the Hadron super conducting super collider near Geneva.  CERN simulated the effect of cosmic rays in the earth’s atmosphere and found that it does indeed influence cloud formation.

This is very inconvenient science for the global warming campaigners, researchers and myriad carbon carpetbaggers, all of whose incomes have come to depend on government willingness to accept the authority of climate models as gospel.  The more people know about computer climate models, the less they are willing to curtail the freedom and prosperity of the developed world.

Can European scientists like Svensmark and the researchers at CERN restore rigorous scientific questioning to climate science?  Will scientists again research, question, write and speak without fear of political reprisal?  Is this the beginning of a new enlightenment?  Europe’s done it before.