Climate Change Nonsense

A recent experiment that CERN conducted confirms that cosmic rays can influence Climate Change. (More Here)

Roger Helmer MEP has written a post for Conservative Home here. where he says.

    The only UK factory producing wind turbines, Vestas in the Isle of Wight, closed in 2009 with the loss of 600 jobs
    Solar panels may create a few temporary jobs on installation, but a large proportion of the panels are made in China, where they have lower labour costs, and (because much of their electricity comes from coal) much lower energy costs
    A study by Spanish Professor Gabriel Calzada of the Juan Carlos University shows that every green job created in Spain cost 2.2 real jobs in the real economy.
    In the USA, President Obama started out as a real champion of green jobs, with a series of projects. We see the same sad story — budgets not spent, projects not completed, and the subsidies to create the green jobs wholly disproportionate to their value.
    The Times, the UK’s newspaper of record, reports that “Government claims (from the previous Labour administration) that the UK supports a million ‘green collar’ jobs have been exposed as a sham”. The figures included North Sea Gas workers — and even wallpaper suppliers.

But these facts are of no interest to the climate change peddlers. Al Gore claims that climate change deniers will be despised just like racists one day. (Story Here)To actually compare the climate change lobby to the civil rights movement of the 1960’s shows how barmy some of these people really are.

But comparing climate change sceptics to racists is nothing compared to what the Guardian has said. The Guardian reports that Aliens may destroy humanity to protect other civilisations.

It seriously says

It may not rank as the most compelling reason to curb greenhouse gases, but reducing our emissions might just save humanity from a pre-emptive alien attack, scientists claim.

Here.

So it would appear that because telling us of this climate change scenario wasn’t working very well they have resorted to trying to scare us with barmy stories of possible alien invasions. As the Guardianista’s think that they are intellectually superior to us, maybe they think we’re thick enough to take such nonsense seriously. Or maybe they’ve caught to much sun meditating in crop circles.

Locally leader of the County Lib Dems Kathy Pollard has been blogging about Green issues here. where she says

Research by the Lib Dems has revealed that Suffolk County Council has failed drastically to meet its own carbon emissions reduction target.

and

Cllr Caroline Page, Lib Dem Spokesperson for Roads and Transport said “This shows that the Greenest County claim is nothing but Greenwash

The reality is that the whole idea of a link between global temperature rises and CO2 is Greenwash.

Kathy Pollard has also blogged about green stuff here. telling us that A range of ‘green buildings’ are open to the public between 8th to 11th of September. Just think of all the carbon you can emit visiting them all.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Climate Change Nonsense

  1. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. Billions have been wasted and will continue to be wasted on Green policies, including those from Chris Huhne which will see thousands more driven into fuel poverty. For what reason? None – but to protect vested interests.

    • Stephen says:

      Exactly. I am pleased you enjoyed the visit of the eminent scientist Piers Corbyn to Ipswich – three years ago, I think?

  2. Mo says:

    The aliens / global warming story was also in the Daily Mail, so they seem to be in agreement with the Guardian on this rather silly report. Strange bedfellows…

  3. The puffins are going extinct because of a shortage of sand eels, that lived in sand on our beaches and fed upon whatever detritus was washed onto them from the land. The clean beaches initiative has virtually ended the practice of sending sewage and other recyclable carbon based effluent onto beaches. Clean beaches are bad for puffins.

    • Stephen says:

      Quite. I meet fewer and fewer people who believe in anthropogenic global warming – even naturalists don’t nowadays.

      • Evan says:

        Since when have naturalists dominantly been advocates of anthropogenic global warming? They are, by definition, interested in the natural history of the earth, but that doesn’t necessarily predispose them to agree with the findings of climate science…

        And as for your anecdotal observation that implies support for the global warming theory is declining, skeptics are actually a minority…… still. A multitude of surveys suggest that over half of America agrees with an anthropogenic cause to climate change.

  4. David Bellamy called it poppycock and he’s never been seen on the BBC since.

    • Stephen says:

      Quite. Those who still adhere to this ridiculous theory have yet to explain the Medieval Warm Period or the regular temperature oscillation before the human race existed. Shall we blame the dinosaurs for driving around in 4x4s all day and leaving the lights on as well?

      • Evan says:

        Climate changes when it’s forced to change. When our planet suffers an energy imbalance and gains or loses heat, global temperature changes. A number of forces can affect the earth’s climate including heat from the sun’s rays and volcanic eruptions.

        It is obviously true that past climate change was caused by natural forcings. However, to argue that this means we can’t cause climate change is like arguing that humans can’t start bushfires because in the past they’ve happened naturally.

        Right now, humans are the major driving force changing the earth’s climate. Where it might have been supra-normal levels of solar activity (this is hypothetical) that caused the medieval warming, greenhouse gases are the primary aggregate to rising surface temperatures in this time period. They’re causing an energy imbalance and the planet is building up heat.

    • Stephen says:

      “Climate science” seems to be about building a computer model and, if the actual climate you can see through the window or feel conflicts with the predictions of your model, then the model is right and the real climate wrong even if it is usually down to making erroneous assumptions. It is about one group of scientists with one theory abandoning those who disagree with them, even when their theory falls apart and is changed surrepititiously.

      Not only did the earth’s climate change before the human race existed, it will change when we are no longer here and the changes before and after were and will be more dramatic than anything we may be experiencing at present. We are just the first species to notice this, to be able to discuss it and to be able to consult scientific evidence from before our own existence – some of us have extrapolated this to making us omniscient, especially as the green extremists have abandoned religion to arrogate divine power.

      Most of us have actually experienced a short-term cooling trend over the past decade and the real culprit is clear – a large red/ yellow sphere in the sky. Short-term heat comes principally from the sun and whether our part of the earth faces it – medium and long-term climate is dictated by whether it’s hotter or cooler spots are facing us. QED.

      • Mo says:

        Are you saying that you think it’s not actually possible for human activity to affect the climate?

        Or do you think that might be possible, but isn’t happening at the moment?

      • Evan says:

        Yes, climate science is about modelling quantitative observations to reconstruct past climates, analyze the present climate, and predict future climates. Recognizing patterns in the data is used for a wide variety of reasons including weather forecasting whenever you flick on your local news channel. But I hope you’re not confusing weather with climate, because, by definition, they’re very different. Climate is an average of the prevailing weather conditions taken over several years. Weather is the day-to-day atmospheric conditions, so when you look or stick your hand out the window, you’re experiencing weather – not climate. And because weather is complex and relies on an innumerable amount of variables, you can’t make any conclusions about the climate based on the weather outside on your summer vacation.

        Also, since when is climate science about one group of people? There are actually many different facets to the discipline, from those who study and predict trends in extreme weather events (like hurricanes) to those who study the history of climate and its relation to human beings. Are you perhaps referring to climate scientists who exclusively construct and analyze models relating rising temperatures to carbon dioxide emissions? And their theory, which I’m assuming is the theory of global warming, has never fallen apart. It’s actually been gaining support over the years – every single national or international scientific academy or society (many of which are not composed of purely climate scientists) has supported the position of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that humans are affecting climate change. The last one with a dissenting opinion, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, revised its opinion in 2007. All that remains is a minority of individual scientists who make claims refuting anthropogenic involvement in our changing climate to which rebuttals have been made.

        You’re correct in saying that the climate has been changing and will continue to change when humans become extinct, but that can be explained by the fact that climate is not static – it is continuously responding to external forces which I have previously discussed. That is not the argument or the point climate scientists are trying to get across – it is that we, as a human race, are threatening our own existence by speeding up the rate at which our own climate is changing during this time period to which the implications are severe.

        The sun has a strong influence on climate as it is the main supplier of energy. Studying climate from the last 1000 years or so, fluctuating global temperatures were largely attributed to solar activity. However, since around the 1960’s, global temperatures have been steadily increasing while the sun has been experiencing a cooling trend – they’re going in opposite directions! This evidence clearly refutes the idea that the sun is solely responsible for this time period’s episode of global warming – something else is causing it, and carbon emissions are the widely supported explanation.

        If you’d like to see the raw data of earth temperature from NASA GISS, go here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

        If you’d like to see the compiled data of solar irradiance, go here (although this one is hard to read, make sure you read the descriptors): ftp://ftp.pmodwrc.ch/pub/data/irradiance/composite/DataPlots/composite_d41_62_1009.dat

  5. Evan says:

    Oh dear. Have we reverted to cherry-picking a handful of articles and statements that, when taken out of context, can easily be used as a climate-change skeptic’s punching bag?

    I’m still trying to consolidate exactly what you are trying to say with this mix-and-match of articles that you have so graciously linked all over this blog post… no seriously, what are you trying to say? And be specific.

  6. Stephen says:

    It is quite likely that it isn’t possible for a single transient species to affect the climate of a planet to any significant level. I have actually seen the equations and every molecule of carbon dioxide emitted is taken care of.

    • Mo says:

      I am interested in what you’re saying, so I hope you don’t mind me pursuing this further. When you say every molecule of carbon dioxide is taken care of, do you mean that you don’t think that humans have been causing the emission of more carbon dioxide during the industrial era? — or that they have been, but this has either not affected the climate or has been negated by some other natural effect?

      • Stephen says:

        Carbon dioxide encourages plants to grow and is absorbed by them – that is where it all goes, as shown by the Corbyn Equations. Piers Corbyn is the astrophysicist who has predicted this summer’s weather and unexpected events more accurately than other sources – his accuracy comes from understanding the theory.

        QED.

      • Mo says:

        Thanks, I’ve had a quick look on his website now and will read more when I have a bit of time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s