Climate – is the fightback starting?

Wednesday/Thursday blog

Two issues today

Issue 1: The Amazon review of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS

In my Monday/Tuesday blog I published a review of my book which claimed it was all a load of ‘dangerous misinformation’. I have looked again at the review and see a couple of things:

• This is not what Amazon calls a ‘verified purchase’. So, as my book is only available through Amazon, either the reviewer has borrowed a copy from someone who has bought the book, or much more likely, the reviewer hasn’t either bought or read it
• Half of the ‘review’ focuses on just the cover picture for the book and the other half is a rant about how catastrophic global warming is real. This once again suggests that the reviewer hasn’t read the book and is only using his/her supposed ‘review’ to try to discourage other people from buying the book

One thing our hideously-misnamed ‘social media’ has taught us is that there are millions of people out there leading such sad, pathetic and empty lives that they spend much of their time looking for things to be offended by because that makes them feel important.

Issue 2: Challenging ‘Net Zero’ with science

Three US academics have recently published a 47-page report slamming the whole ‘Net Zero’ nonsense. Most of the material in the report will be familiar to readers of this and similar blogs. While I agree with everything in this new report, personally, I find the style of the report slightly over-academic and insufficiently easily digestible for my taste. I’m not quite sure why, but I find this report badly-written, badly-organised and badly thought-through. I think it would have been better with 15 to 20 pages of hard-hitting facts demolishing the climate-catastrophist narrative rather than the rather meandering approach it takes in my humble opinion. But so often that’s a problem with real experts, they’re brilliant in their subject, but not always brilliant communicators.

Anyway, here’s a link to the report so you can judge for yourselves:

https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/printable-2023-02-23-B-Challenging-Net-Zero-with-Science.pdf

And here’s the Executive Summary

Governments around the world are taking actions to implement fossil fuel-free or “Net Zero” energy systems without a thorough examination of the scientific basis for doing so. This paper undertakes that examination by reviewing the scientific support (or lack thereof) that has been used to justify this transition to Net Zero. No attempt is made to address the significant economic, societal or environmental consequences of a near-total reliance on renewable energy and the required battery-backup that is necessary to transition to a fossil fuel free future.

Two of the paper’s authors – Drs. William Happer and Richard Lindzen, professors emeritus at Princeton University and Massachusets Institute of Technology, respectively – have spent decades studying and writing about the physics of Earth’s atmosphere. The third, Gregory Wrightstone, a geologist of more than 40 years, has spent much of the last decade writing and
speaking about the interplay of geology, history and climate.

The authors find that Net Zero – the global movement to eliminate fossil fuels and its emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases – to be scientifically invalid and a threat to the lives of billions of people. Among the paper’s findings are:

• Net Zero proponents regularly report that extreme weather is more severe and frequent because of climate change while the evidence shows no increase – and, in some cases, a decrease – in such events.
• Computer models supporting every government Net Zero regulation and the trillions of dollars subsidizing renewables and electric cars, trucks, home heating, appliances and many other products do not work.
• Scientific research and studies that do not support the “consensus” narrative of harmful man-made global warming are routinely censored and excluded from government reports such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Climate Assessment.
• Conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that contradict the narrative of catastrophic global warming from fossil fuels are rewritten by government bureaucrats for public reports to support the false narrative of Net Zero.
• The many benefits of modest warming and increasing carbon dioxide are routinely either eliminated or minimized in governmental reports.
• Eliminating fossil fuels and implementing Net Zero policies and actions mean the elimination of fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides that will result in about half the world’s population not having enough food to eat. Many would starve.
• The adoption of Net Zero is the rejection of overwhelming scientific evidence that there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2.

Net Zero, then, violates the tenets of the scientific method that for more than 300 years has underpinned the advancement of western civilization.