We’re publishing a guest post on the eve of COP26 by journalist Chris Morrison that asks why journalists and politicians are so willing to accept at face value a scientific hypothesis that relies on the outputs of climate models, given that the track record of those models in predicting the future has so far proved to be very poor?
Delegates gathering in Glasgow for COP26 to try to stop the climate heating up face the rather inconvenient truth that the average temperature in Scotland hasn’t moved for about 15 years. Indeed IPCC members might wish to cast a new hockey temperature stick. With the handle now stretched along the horizontal, rather than the vertical, it can replace the previous climate mascot – long gone after some unseemly disputes over the surprise abolition of the medieval warming period and the subsequent mini ice age.
The delegates plan to stay for two weeks. One must hope they have packed warm clothing. For years, average November temperatures in Scotland have been dropping like a stone. It’s so bad that temperatures are falling to levels last seen in the ‘90s – the 1890s.
These trends are not confined to Scotland. Met Office figures show a similar pattern for the U.K. In fact, the 2010s were colder across the U.K. than the 2000s – a fall in average temperature from 9.3C to 9.17C, again according to official Met Office figures. On a global level, both highly accurate satellite measurements and surface measurements show that there has been no warming for seven years – and counting.
But of course the science that states humans are causing all or most global warming is ‘settled’. But of course it isn’t. The suggestion is an unproven scientific hypothesis based on the output of climate models that over a 30-year period have yet to record an accurate forecast among them. The vast majority greatly over-estimate global warming, yet are routinely presented as evidence for a hard green agenda that says the matter and science is beyond debate. The latest IPCC ‘code red’ report relies on yet more soaring model forecasts, that can stretch to 6C warming, while anyone commenting on the current position has for 20 years had to keep to just 1.1C warming since the early 1800s.
As they don’t say in the climate modelling business – ‘Garbage In, Gospel Out’.
Sceptics of the hypothesis are routinely traduced as ‘deniers’, although quite where the equivalence is between denying the proven fact of the Nazi holocaust and questioning fanciful climate model predictions is hard to see.
Of course the flatlining temperature should be well known to agenda-driven journalists, politicians, activists and academics, hence the recent move from global warming to Climate Crisis, then Climate Emergency and now Climate Breakdown. To back up these emotional claims, the emphasis has turned to ‘extreme’ weather – what we used to call bad weather. Heat, cold, rain or drought, everyone is a winner. Of course, cherry picking individual weather events and blaming it on long term changes in the climate is about as unscientific as you can get and not a scintilla of credible proof has yet been produced to back up the claims.
Almost daily, the headlines are filled with news from the Met Office’s gauge at Heathrow airport where record temperatures are to be found, helped by acres of concrete and black tarmac and the warm breezes from jet engines and numerous industrial aircon units. In 2019 the BBC highlighted one ‘record’ high temperature in one day in Antarctica and splashed it across all of its media outlets. The recent news that the South Pole had its coldest six month winter since records began was ignored. One-off event good, longer term trends bad.
If your correspondent thought that the world faced an existential threat from burning previous dead plant and animal matter, he would be first in the queue to super-glue his bits to the M25. He might even be tempted to fly half way across the world and lecture the adoring crowds from a pink boat parked in Oxford Circus, in the manner of Dame Emma ‘First Class’ Thompson. But to make that informed choice he would need to be aware of the recent work of the noted atmospheric scientist Professor William Happer, emeritus Professor of Physics at Princeton, who argued that the heating properties of CO2 fall as more is placed in the atmosphere. The work is complex and it talks of the ‘forcing’ ability of CO2 and water vapour (a much more plentiful and abundant greenhouse gas) becoming ‘saturated’ at current levels. Professor Happer also argues that the world is emerging from a period of denudation of C02 and needs more, particularly if the planet is to continue greening – up 14% in the last 30 years. Numerous scientists agree with this last point.
Happer is a renowned authority on radiation physics and his conclusions may be right, or they may be wrong. They certainly offer some explanation as to why C02 levels were 10 times higher when dinosaurs the size of London buses roamed the world 100 million years ago. The temperature was a little higher and life in all forms was abundant.
But Happer is ignored. In 2006 the BBC met in secret conclave and decided to stop covering sceptical climate science. In 2018 the Guardian published a letter signed by numerous green activists such as Caroline Lucas and George Monbiot stating they would no longer “lend their credibility” by debating climate science scepticism. Presumably they will not be lending their credibility to Professor Antonio Zichichi, another emeritus Professor of Physics, who published a letter in 2019, along with 70 Italian academics, warning about signing up to policies of uncritical reductions of CO2 with “the illusory pretence of governing the climate”.
Professor Zichichi was unperturbed by the Guardian no-shows and the undoubted blow to his credibility. He was too busy discovering nuclear antimatter.
We don’t know for certain if humans cause all or most global warming by burning fossil fuel. But it seems highly unlikely. From around 1945 to the late 1970s, there was a fall in global temperatures and the almost unanimous fear was global cooling. Then the temperature rose for 20 years leading to the ‘settled’ science of global warming. Now it is flatlining and possibly heading for cooling so Armageddon beckons with ‘extreme’ weather. Is CO2 to blame? Well, humans only contribute 3% of all CO2 entering the atmosphere. If we destroy our industrial lifestyle by cutting our modest contribution, can we be sure the other 97% will behave itself in a world that is naturally warming a little, as it has done countless times in the past? A small test recently occurred when the Covid pandemic cut human global CO2 emissions by 7% in 2020. It had no discernible effect on the overall rise, which seems likely to be a product of a gently warming natural climate.
On the basis of an uncertain hypothesis which has become an argument-free agenda for most members of the mainstream media, politicians, activists, state-sponsored scientists and subsidy-hungry industrialists, we are embarking on net zero with little idea, or seemingly care, of the disastrous effect it will have on human society across the globe. Almost every new technology to replace our existing cheap and reliable power has severe disadvantages and heavy costs. The warnings of green disaster have long been evident. In 2018 the long established Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland warned that the Scottish and U.K. Government green energy policy was likely to lead to severe electricity blackouts. Such events, it warned, “lead to death, severe societal and industrial disruption, civil disturbance and loss of production”.
As delegates in rapidly cooling Glasgow jack up the central heating, they might like to stop the constant virtue signalling and concentrate on events – and science – in the real world.
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.
the GLP, an entity funded primarily by the public
This statement might give the impression it was in some way tax-payer funded. To be clear – it is non-profit funded by donations.
I wonder where some of those donations have come from?
Suckers. Maugham loses every case.
“We are hugely grateful to have received support from Avaaz, Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, Lund Trust, a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin, Necessity, 38 Degrees, and Dale Vince, CEO of Ecotricity.“
The enemy.
The GLP is headed up by Jolyon Maughan, the fox killing KC, a legend in his own lunchbox.
in his wife’s Kimono, I think you mean.
Three downvotes for pointing out a fact!
I am just pleased to get 44 upvotes – a novel experience for me.
It’s essentially funded by the radical left/big money.
The Good Law Project?
This rogue outfit clearly does not have a clue about ‘good law’ and is very definitely conducting itself via false promises. The failure to understand what has gone on these last three years is staggering. Furthermore, the dangers of the so called vaccines are now becoming mainstream. Does the GLP not understand what underscores the Hippocratic Oath – first do no harm?
HART and other like-minded groups should consider taking the GLP to court. I would happily contribute.
Perhaps it should be renamed; how about “The Oxymoronic Project”?
Or Grift Law Project?
The Good Law Project that loses every case it takes to court.
At the same time, didn’t the GMC try to section Dr Sam White if I remember correctly.
Dr Sam White won his case on the basis of freedom of speech, judgement since removed from the website where case judgements are posted for reference, so it’s good to see that the GMC are applying the judgement to Dr Malhotra’s case.
My understanding of the GLP is they only exist to campaign for donations to pay their fees so that they can carry out lawfare.
Congratulations to all the signatories in support of Dr Malhotra.
An courageous and outstandingly honourable position to have taken
The GLP has form. See Guido Fawkes for his many postings on Jolyon Maughan, the founder of GLP. He comments that “Jolyon Maugham triggers Judical Reviews as often as Guido has hangovers”. I rest my case m’lord.
Well this particular ‘case’ is not on the GLP website, so I’m wondering if they have since disassociated from it (this dates back to June). The fact that they have ‘nearly raised £5k in all that time since speaks volumes.
No doubt that is precisely the intent.
Somebody doesn’t want independent doctors but rather obedient foot soldiers.
Didn’t the GLP get one of their recent cases thrown out when the judge decided that they themselves had no ‘standing’ inthe case (ie not directly impacted by the law they were seeking to challenge)
Well, GLP are clearly neither involved in, nor impacted by the decision to allow Aseem to speak his mind.
This is simply an attempt to use the courts to cancel someone they dislike. Fatuous nonsense, I hope this case dies on its ar5e.
It probably will and the GLP probably know it too.
Regardless, they will have achieved their aim which is one of intimidation.
Other doctors will have taken note and will be that much more reluctant to speak up just to avoid the hassle of a lawsuit, because however spurious, fighting one takes time, money and energy.
Jolyon Maugham, who runs GLP is the classic champagne socialist. There may be people who don’t know in which case please the following link highlighting his notorious role as a notorious beater to death of foxes, just in case….. RSPCA investigates after lawyer Jolyon Maugham kills fox with baseball bat – BBC News.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/doctors-resist-attempts-to-silence-dr-malhotra/
TCW have reported this as Breaking News.
The more the better.
Oh dear, if the kimono-clad fox-killer is involved then it certainly isn’t anything related to good law. Leftwaffe arse.
I’m just thankful we still have a modicum of free speech in this country – evidenced by the freedom of the ‘Good Law Project’ to make an utter fool of themselves. Chilling, nonetheless and also chilling is their 1984 distortion of language in their title.
Who is Dr Matt Kneale and why did he instigate this case against the GMC and Dr Malhotra?
Jealousy or money. The old favourites for legal action.
I suspect a sectarian angle: “Malhotra” is a name associated with Hindu and/or Sikh beliefs; “Matt Kneale” has clear Islamic connotations.
Thank you for lightening my mood.
Never heard of him before but if it’s the same Matthew Kneale who has made several (approx 900) FOI requests, he has a keen interest in Trust disciplinary processes and GMC referrals…and also free car parking for NHS staff.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/user/matthew_kneale
a.k.a. a complete Bellend with far to much time on his hands. Co-Chair of Doctors; Association UK – “A non-profit organisation lead by frontline doctors. Led by frontline doctors. For frontline doctors. We advocate for both the medical profession and patients and we fight for a better NHS”
That’s alright then, no possible conflicts of interest here. A low rent version of the BMA.
The Good Law Project – which supported Mermaids in their disastrous own-goal legal challenge against the LGB Alliance – has a name like 1984’s Ministry of Peace, Ministry of Love and Ministry of Plenty.
Only sorry I didn’t hear about this, as I would have signed it as well.
“Good Law Project”
Pull the other one.
If you’ve got to include the word “good” in the name, it means it probably isn’t.
BTW good interview with Dr Malhotra on the Highwire last week.
Hopefully this is a case of any publicity is good publicity for the cause. We need more medics to speak out.
I have previously supported the Good Law with donations. Never again.
Me too and I am or was on their email list, but certainly never got one about this case.
Once again I do not see one GP or rheumatologist’s name in our practice or local hospital. Surely they are witnessing the severe serious adverse events and deaths post covid vaxxes. I have lost faith in our GP’s and consultants. How on earth, can they continue to participate in the admin of these unsafe and ineffective experimental biologicals?
My guess is that they are keeping their heads down, knowing how deep in the sh1t they are and incapable of imagining a way out.
GLP seem to have shut down their contact form as mine would not send.
“I have previously donated to GLP’s projects.
Your apparently unreasonable witch hunt of Dr. Aseem Malhotra is beyond the pale and I will not be supporting GLP ever again.
Such a shame and very much anti free speech. “
Jolyon Maugham, Law’s most affected and Narcissistic practitioner, expert in emptying the pockets of suckers to fund his hopeless cases.
Good Law Project.
I declare an oxymoron.