One of the giants of modern science, Dr. John Clauser, has signed the World Climate Declaration (WCD) that states there is no climate emergency. Dr. Clauser is last year’s joint winner of the Nobel physics prize, and he recently sent shock waves through the climate industry by stating the popular climate narrative “reflects a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy, and the well-being of billions of people”. The WCD argues that climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound critical science.
Last August, the Daily Sceptic highlighted the WCD in an article that went viral on social media. The WCD has drawn comparison with the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) which publicised the views of eminent medical scientists who dissented from the disastrous Covid lockdown episode. As with the GBD, the WCD has been ignored by mainstream politicians and media. But since last August, it has attracted another 500 signatories, and the current list numbers 1,609 scientists and professionals. Over 300 academics at professorial levels have signed the list, while Clauser is the second Nobel physics laureate to lend support.
The WCD holds that climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science. For his part, Clauser told a recent group of young Korean scientists that they must follow the scientific method based on good observations and experiments. Good observations always overrule purely speculative theory. Referring to climate science, he noted the world was “literally awash, saturated, with pseudoscience, with bad science, with scientific misinformation and disinformation”. At a time when the unhinged head of the United Nations Antonio Guterres was claiming the world had entered an era of “global boiling”, he gave his opinion that the UN-funded IPCC “is one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation”.
The WCD is wide-ranging in its criticism of the current ‘settled’ climate narrative that has been ruthlessly compiled over decades to promote an extremist Net Zero agenda. It notes that climate models are “not remotely plausible as global policy tools”. They are said to “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. There is no need for panic and alarm, it advises.
But of course panic and alarm plays a vital part in pushing the collectivist Net Zero agenda. As Clauser observes: “Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.”
The latest signatories to the WCD include many distinguished scientists. These are a few of the recent additions.
• Emeritus Professor Michael Wilson, former Executive Dean at the University of West Sydney. Over 30 years of teaching and researching environmental chemistry.
• Emeritus Associate Chemistry Professor Neils Harrrit, University of Copenhagen.
• Dr Hendrik Schlesing, 30 years working at the Huggard Consulting Group on a number of scientific topics including international environmental impacts.
• Dr Stefano Gallozzi, researcher at the Italian Institute for Astrophysics, Astronomical Observatory of Rome, and president of the Safeguarding Astronomical Sky Foundation.
• Paul P A Mazza, Associate Professor of Quaternary Geology and Paleontology and Archeozoology at the University of Florence.
• Physics Professor Julian Schins, specialist in near infrared spectroscopy at the Delft University of Technology.
• Mikael Lindgren, Professor of Physics at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, specialising in optics and spectroscopy.
• Isabel Lopez Garcia, Assistant Professor of Physical Chemistry and Applied Thermodynamics at the University of Cordoba.
• Dr M M Ali, Senior Scientist at the Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies at Florida State University. Dr Ali’s main research interest is ocean-atmosphere interaction with special reference to wind stress and ocean heat content.
The WCD is the work of the Clintel Foundation, a body in the Netherlands that is becoming increasingly influential in the fight against bad science promoting an unworkable Net Zero political ideology. Earlier this year, it published an in-depth and highly critical review of the recent sixth assessment reports of the IPCC. It found that the IPCC rewrote climate history, emphasised worse case scenarios, and displayed a “huge bias” in favour of bad news. It reported the shocking fact that 42% of its impact claims rely on improbable rises of 5°C in less than 80 years that even the UN body considers of “low likelihood”. Even worse, it was disclosed that about half of all climate science papers used these implausible assumptions.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Stop Press: A reader reports that the Avast software she has installed on her computer, supposedly to guard against viruses, has blocked the above link to the World Climate Declaration, which Avast has apparently ‘blacklisted’. She attached this screenshot as proof:
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.
Throwing trillions into the madness that is “Net Zero” will end up killing billions of people world wide. Extreme “Net Zero” ideology means shutting down almost all industrialised agriculture. It means limited or no winter heating for citizens of cold climate countries and it means limited or no air conditioning for hot countries.
No heating, no cooling, no food.
Net Zero will become the Holocaust times 1000 if allowed to become reality.
People in Governments around the world already know this but they’re too busy gorging from the taxpayer funded green energy scam trough like the little corrupt scum balls they are.
Every media outlet and “journalist” that promotes Climate Change hysteria will be complicit in the murder of billions.
Powerful comment. ——-It really is as serious as you say, and this is why I despise the BBC, and SKY with their “Climate Show”. The Guardian and that insidious Irish guy from the Independent that I see all the time on GB News that are all as guilty as sin of the crimes that you describe.
“Throwing trillions into the madness that is “Net Zero” will end up killing billions of people world wide.”
Killing billions is the aim of Net Zero.
“Every media outlet and “journalist” that promotes Climate Change hysteria will be complicit in the murder of billions.”
Just as they are complicit in the great CONVID, LOCKDOWN, MASKING, murder JAB scams, we still don’t see them looking too worried about it though. Not yet anyhow.
Mr Sunak: Drop Nut Zero (to give your party more than Bob Hope).
This is very welcome news. But unfortunately – just like with the Covid Scamdemic – most of the genuine experts have taken a very long time to step forward and challenge the Globalists’ $ciencific Propaganda.
How much better it would have been if the “narrative” had been challenged even 10 years ago.
Chris – thanks for another timely piece. If you have the bandwidth, suspect many of us would like to read something from you on the Clintel foundation.
“If you have the bandwidth…”
Eh ?
Come again.
If he has the time?
“Climate Crisis”, “Climate Emergency” etc is the language of Politics not Science. ————————- So is there a “Climate Crisis”? Well that depends entirely on your politics. If you think there is one, then to you there is. But that does not mean there really is a “climate crisis”. It only means you think there is one, and you are entitled to think that and to vote accordingly at elections. But please do not call it “Science”.—– “Climate Crisis” and “Climate Emergency” are not supported by any science, and models full of assumptions and guesses that project such a thing are not science any more than a pocket calculator is mathematics. Once an issue becomes politicised like climate is then we are in serious trouble because once you mix science with politics what you end up with every time is —POLITICS.
The mistaken theory that co2, tarred as “carbon”, drives dangerous runaway global warming is at the root of net zero.
Every link to every article that refutes this theory does some good.
Keep chipping away.
Because carbon dioxide is a colourless, odourless gaseous plant food which is necessary for all life on this planet (apart from some anaerobic bacteria) whereas carbon is black like soot and coal and oil and some sheep.
Actually, if you puff neat CO2 it tastes like soda water. In another life (in my gap year job when I used it for anaesthetising fleas – don’t ask), a squirt of CO2 was a refreshing way to relieve the monotony of counting fleas.
But your point stands!
Can you say “black’?
Greenhouse gas is already a misnomer. Greenhouses work because they’re made out of glas.
Also very good and informative: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/two-princeton-mit-scientists-say-epa-climate-regulations-based-hoax
The emergency is some people think it’s a good idea to block out the sun or seed the clouds… We will eventually destroy ourselves of this I have no doubt.
Sounds like the plot of Highlander II.
The petition’s signatories share two traits common to anthropogenic climate denialists:
Are old white men more intelligent then?
What is a climatologist? Have any of their predictions been accurate and how do we know that what has changed is due to the causes they claim it is and not something else?
Loon
Desperate stuff, ‘Godfree’.
If you’re not a young black female scientist, you may not be taken too seriously. If you are, please tell us what kind of degree you hold.
To be clear:
1) skin colour, age and sex do not and should not represent a barrier to scientific excellence. The fact that you think they do does you no credit;
2) there’s no such thing as a ‘climatologist’ – only specialists in recognised fields (physics, maths, chemistry, vulcanology etc) who apply their specialisms to the vast, otherwise unapproachable question of the climate, thereby contributing to an overall picture;
3) your use of the term “denialists” and your hilarious name – ‘Godfree’ – tell us all we need to know about your deep yearning to see climate ‘science’ as a religion – and a particularly exclusive and repressive one at that.
My advice: don’t confuse yourself by mixing race, sexual identity and religion with questions of objective science. If you do, you risk talking a lot of steaming, absurd, irrelevant sh*t.
Great riposte Clive.
You obviously don’t believe in the old saying that “It’s better to keep quiet and let people think you are stupid than to open your mouth and prove the point”
That’s made me laugh. Have heard it somewhere before, but it’s particularly applicable here.
So, you’ve actually checked all 1600 plus of them? No, I didn’t think so. Stop quoting idiotic percentages.
Very good point. The sign of an undisciplined mind in an unintelligent person.
Signs the climate narrative is collapsing just like the covid one did.
The clintel.org site is also being blocked by my AVG anti-virus software using the same excuse as the one reported.
I believe you can set individual websites to not be blocked, but of course it is pure censorship to block websites.
Some believe they are infallible, morally superior and can never be wrong so they censor opinions and ideas different from their opinion.