Scientists continue to flock to sign the World Climate Declaration that states there is no climate emergency. Over 200 people have signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD) over the last few weeks, including 20 university professors. A number of the professors and other academics signing the declaration are experts in pure science fields such as chemistry and physics. Over 300 scientists and professionals have signed the WCD since August 18th, when the Daily Sceptic highlighted the project and interest soared across social media. The total signatories, led by the Norwegian physics Nobel Prize winner Professor Ivar Giaever, now number over 1,400.
It would not be an exaggeration to note that the recent publicity given to the WCD has struck terror into the ranks of the established and largely pseudoscientific climate community, whose gravy train of ‘settled’ science is fuelled by almost unlimited amounts of money and provides the political narrative for the command-and-control Net Zero agenda. Fact checks and social media personal attacks have been launched, but the scale of scientific scepticism is becoming increasingly difficult to deny. Nearly 300 professors alone have now signed the declaration.
The WCD states that climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. It continues: “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.” Climate models are said to have many shortcomings, “and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools”. They are said to exaggerate or “blow up” the effect of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and “ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial”. There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying natural disasters and there is no climate emergency. Therefore, notes the WCD, there is no cause for panic and alarm.
The latest signatories to these statements include many distinguished scientists and academics:
- Yonatan Dubi, Professor of Theoretical Physics and Chemistry at Ben-Gurion University. Professor Dubi’s recent work includes a paper on “Photothermal nonlinearity plasmon-assisted photocatalysis”. He is the co-founder of the Israeli Forum for Rational Environmentalism.
- A. E. (Ted) Dixon, Emeritus Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Waterloo in Ontario. Dr. Dixon’s research career has focused on the development and commercial application of scanning laser-imaging technology.
- Eric Verrecchia, Professor at the University of Lausanne, Chair of Biogeochemistry at the Institute of Earth Surface Dynamics, noted to be an expert in the terrestrial carbon cycle of the tropical and temperate zones.
- Majed Chergui, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry and Physics, is a multi-award winning pioneering authority on the use and application of ultrafast X-ray spectroscopy. He has served on a number of Swiss and international committees, and is the founding Editor-in-Chief of Structural Dynamics, published by the American Institute of Physics.
- Jozinus Ploeg is the retired Vice-President of Engineering and Technology at the National Research Council in Canada. His field of expertise is said to be the transfer of energy from the atmosphere to the surface of the ocean and wave mechanics.
- Alain Preat, PhD geology, Emeritus Professor at the University of Brussels.
- Paul Goddard, retired Professor of Radiology at the University of West England.
- Olav Martin Kvalheim, Emeritus Professor, Chemistry, Bergen University.
- Jan de Jager, Emeritus Professor of Geology, University of Amsterdam.
- Gleb Evgenev, Environment Professor, Moscow State Technical University.
- Duncan Veasey, a Canadian psychiatrist with a particular interest in mass hysteria, authoritarianism and social compliance.
- Anthony Janio, former U.K. Conservative leader on Brighton and Hove Council. Now Independent. PhD Physics.
As I have noted before, critics of the list point to a lack of what they term ‘climate scientists’. This term is a fairly recent invention. An understanding of the complexities of climate and atmosphere requires input from many individual science and observational disciplines. All of these disciplines are represented in the WCD list.
Having declared the actual science ‘settled’, most work that travels under the term climate science is actually concerned with putative impacts and geographical observations. Most conclusions and forecasts are produced by models attempting the impossible in trying to predict the complexities of the non-linear atmosphere. Few, if any, predictions are ever proved correct, notably over temperature. Most catastrophic narratives remain figments of overactive imaginations. There is a tendency for those involved in such work to call themselves ‘climate scientists’, suggestive of a closed priesthood that disqualifies all non-believers. The latest hocus-pocus is the attempt to ‘attribute’ single bad weather events to long-term changes in the climate.
Ahead of COP27, this overactive imagination has been in full flow. The Guardian informs us that the world is close to “irreversible” climate breakdown. One of the world “leading climate scientists” tells us that the climate has reached a “really bleak moment”. Collective action is needed to avoid “tipping points”, and, needless to say, time is running out “very, very fast”.
Routine stuff, of course, ahead of a COP, and this time it is supplied by Professor Johan Rockstrom, a Professor of Earth System Science and a Director of the green activist Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. He claimed the collapse of the Greenland ice cap may have already past a so-called tipping point, although recent news from that area suggests the ice sheet might have increased in size of late. Even on the basis of pessimistic annual modelling to August 2022, the melting of the 2.85 quadrillion tonnes may take around 100,000 years to complete.
Professor Rockstrom’s earlier education was supplied by two agricultural colleges. His PhD from Stockholm University was on “Systems Ecology and Natural Resource Management”. All fine stuff, but it is a bit of an ask to take his word, and those of thousands of other climate activists, that the climate is breaking down due to complex scientific interactions. Some might think that such interactions are understood in greater detail by pure science specialists such as chemists and physicists.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
But they are not ‘climate’ scientists and only what ‘climate’ scientists say is valid – unless they dispute the claims of the Climate Science Blob.
Perhaps a “Climate scientist” is a bit like a “Public health expert” or a member of SAGE or someone from the WHO – “experts” who have a strong interest in prolonging the “emergency” that they say they are uniquely placed to quantify. It’s a bit like asking the mafia for fire insurance.
Nice gas boiler there mate, be a real shame if anything bad happened to it, knoworrimean?
Duncan Veasey, a Canadian psychiatrist with a particular interest in mass hysteria, authoritarianism and social compliance.
What has he done and where has he been over the last 2 1/2 years?
It is essential to know enough about a subject to separate valid science from junk science. Most politicians juggling all manner of issues cannot tell the difference. The Post Normal, Virtual Science (climate modelling) and advocacy science has set a trap for politicians, and most are falling into it like lemmings over a cliff in what can only be described as group think madness. Ofcourse if politicians and “scientists” don’t dive over that cliff they won’t find themselves in work for very long. Mobilising an appropriate expert has become the safe way to pass the buck and leaves the clutter left behind by absurd climate polices to be blamed on the so-called expert. But apparently only the experts with one particular point of view. That is the desired point of view that we are causing a climate emergency when infact no empirical evidence exists for such a statement. There is nothing unusual about current climate or temperature and there is no increase in extreme weather events. The idea that there will be all of those things comes from climate models which have so far all been totally wrong and cannot even hindcast the climate when we know what the climate has done. That energy policy is based on the output from those models is absurd, and simply reveals that the policies were already decided and the models full of assumptions where basic parameters aren’t known or are poorly understood are stuck out there to convince an unsuspecting public of the urgency of the so called “crisis”.——There is no climate emergency and the UK being only responsible for less than 1% of the CO2 emissions that are allegedly causing it cannot make a jot of a difference even if the junk science is remotely true.
Some will argue that the above signatories are not “climate scientists”. But you don’t need to be one to see that the science backing it up is deeply flawed. Any decent scientist or engineer can see that it’s nonsense.
Yes anyone who disagrees is “not a climate scientist” , But anyone who agrees is never questioned no matter what they do for a living. You can be a King a Pop Star or a Pope and you can spout all manner of alarmist drivel and no one will say “but your not a climate scientist” ———I remember a Cardinal pointing out to the Pope after he gave a speech on climate that “The Church has no mandate from the Lord to pontificate on matters of science”—–True, but all of those non climate scientists do it anyway and it will be all over the BBC and SKY when they do.
As the leader says it’s just pseudo-science.
200 yrs of questionable and cherry picked data used to programme computer models of which only the worst case scenarios are used and this to predict the future response of a planetary system that’s been “running” for 4.5 billion years. The best they’ve ever been able to do has “maybe” “might” and “could happen” attached as caveats.
The phrase “it is not even wrong” springs to mind.
Actual scientists such as those that published results confirming the Higg’s Boson needed a level of accuracy called 5-sigma. That’s a bit difficult to explain quickly but let’s say it’s a 99.99994% accuracy.
“In most cases, a five-sigma result is considered the gold standard for significance, corresponding to about a one-in-a-million chance that the findings are just a result of random variations; six sigma translates to one chance in a half-billion that the result is a random fluke.”
Chem trails all over britain. In Bruges this week, yep they are being discharged here as well. Saw them in Chicago in August. Why is no one speaking about them? They are changing our weather? When was the last time you saw a bright blue sky? Perhaps someone might find out who is spreading the chem trails, how they are affecting our lives (crops, trees, animals, bird life, creatures, humans, water sources, soil and humans who are not getting their Vit D). So yes, there is climate change and yes it is man made. We just don’t know the man is nor what is being spread in these chemtrails.
Pentagons were drawn in chemtrails yesterday in the south of England…. It’s the same cabal who are behind the covid scamdemic, the Net Zero insanity, the programmable central bank digital currencies & the drive to control the world for their own malign purposes.
Yesterday afternoon I had the misfortune to see an advertisement on Sky where the moon came down to earth (yes, really) and saw what terrible damage we were causing! It signed off with the pledge that Sky would become carbon zero.
Apart from the total scientific garbage it presented, my concern was that a lot of viewers would be taken in. That’s our problem, the lack of common sense in the population at large.
Remebering that Sky is a part of the Trusted News initiative (trusted to say what they are told?) and their commitment to this nonsense should be expected and it’s detailed here. More propoganda incoming
https://www.skygroup.sky/sky-zero
I presume some of the eminent people who have signed the World Climate Declaration will be invited to COP27 so they can debate the subject with the Eco Nutters?
Oh, and to Charlie-boy’s shindig at the Palace. After all, as our Monarch, he has to remain impartial over political matters.
And Climate Change/Net Zero is most definitely a political matter.