With the UN’s annual climate gabfest, held this time in exotic Marrakech, now done and dusted, it is worth drilling down on the exact “science” that these luxurious and opulent meetings are supposedly based upon…
Assessing the current state of the climate should be a necessary precursor to all ‘climate-crisis’ meetings in order to justify not only the hundreds of thousands of tons of
CO2 carbon emissions emitted whilst jetting in the thousands of climate elites from every corner of the globe. But also to account for the millions upon millions of (your) taxpayer dollars spent in order to hold each lavish event.
25,903 participants had the time of their lives…
- Global temperatures have been virtually flat for about 18 years according to satellite data, and peer-reviewed literature is now scaling back predictions of future warming.
- The U.S. has had no Category 3 or larger hurricane make landfall since 2005 – the longest spell since the Civil War.
- Strong F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.
- Despite claims of snow being ‘a thing of the past,’ cold season snowfall has been rising.
- Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century, with recent deceleration.
- Droughts and floods are neither historically unusual nor caused by mankind, and there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather.
- So-called hottest year claims are based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree to tenths of a degree Fahrenheit – differences that are within the margin of error in the data. In other words, global temperatures have essentially held very steady with no sign of acceleration.
- A 2015 NASA study found Antarctica was NOT losing ice mass and ‘not currently contributing to sea level rise.’
- 2016 Arctic sea ice was 22% greater than the recent low point of 2012. The Arctic sea ice is now in a 10-year ‘pause’ with ‘no significant change in the past decade’
- Deaths due to extreme weather have declined dramatically.
- Polar bears are doing fine, with their numbers way up since the 1960s.
I would also add to the list, the stubborn and inconvenient fact that 97% of 102 UN-IPCC CMIP5 predictive climate models DO NOT accord with observed reality.
They are all running ‘too hot’.
This is problematic as these same unverifiable climate models form the basis of the literal trillions of dollars of taxpayer money that directly funds radical climate policy and the schemes and scams that go with it like misguided and “unreliable” energy solutions – wind and solar.
Decide for yourself if there is a so called “Climate Crisis” and just how are the estimated trillions of dollars, earmarked to de-carbonise the globe, supposed to change the weather or adjust the temperature of the planet, and by how much exactly? No one really knows.
If you feel CFACT’s list of peer-reviewed and scientific climate realities are “cherry-picked”, ask yourself why no UN climate ‘expert’ or anyone at a climate conference will ever dare discuss these points. Of course they won’t and can’t because each point fundamentally wrecks their climate narrative and political agenda.
Then ask yourself why Marc Morano and his CFACT delegation were forcibly censored and shut-down by UN security for presenting these pesky facts (in front of a life-size Donald Trump cutout no less! Gold).
Note to Marc and other dissenters of the preferred wisdom of climate theology: If you want an invite to a UN climate event, and wish to remain for the entire two weeks enjoying the inner-sanctum of climate groupthink, pampering and chatter, you best pack the preferred memes of the climate crisis industry and use them frequently – “the science is settled” and “97% of all scientists agree”. Both equally deceptive and thoroughly debunked climate memes aimed to stifle debate, intimidate and isolate.
“Science” is never settled, nor does science listen to or work through “consensus”.
What We Do Know About UN Climate Meetings and Radical Agenda
With such little evidence of a ‘climate crisis’, why does the UN insist the world spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on futile climate change policies? Perhaps Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN’s Framework on Climate Change has the answer?
In Brussels February, 2015 she said, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution.”
In other words, the real agenda is concentrated political authority. Global warming is the hook.
Global warming has long abandoned any connection it has with actual science. It is has become as ideology. A new religion. Australia’s former Prime Minister Tony Abbott likening it to, “socialism masquerading as environmentalism“.
Figueres also added that “Communism is the best model to fight global warming.“
Ideology over Science
In 2013, UN IPCC co-chair of Working Group 3 Dr. Ottmar Endenhoefer unleashed this stunning revelation…
Follow The Money
The shock election of Donald J. Trump as President-elect of the United States has put Green groups in a literal (money) spin…
The Marrakesh COP22 climate conference has ended – and green groups are just waking up that without US financial support, nobody has committed any money to anything.
“I’m a little worried by the lack of financial support to help poor countries adapt. This conference has been taking place in Africa, it was generally agreed that there should be more money, but in concrete terms unfortunately these decisions failed to materialise,” said Lutz Weischer, team leader on international climate policy at Germanwatch.
It is genuinely possible most of the members of groups like Greenpeace and Germanwatch really didn’t know where all the money was coming from. Sounds crazy, but think about it – all greens had to do in the past is make a lot of noise, and bundles of cash turned up. They never had any reason to question where the cash was coming from.
I suspect climate activists are only now waking to the horrible possibility that after years of partying on the US taxpayer’s dime, they really don’t have that many friends anymore.
The two week conference, catering for 25,903 participants was declared the “conference of action”. Which is why the Paris rule has been delayed to 2018!
What a waste of time and…’
CO2 carbon emissions’.
As with all climate conferences, kicking the can down the road was to be expected and who’s complaining with another guaranteed two years of champagne, foie gras and chatter at exotic locations, on the taxpayer dime…
- Shock news : The UN’s Real Agenda Is A New World Order Under Its Control | Climatism
- Socialism Masquerading As Environmentalism | Climatism
- Skeptical scientists crash UN climate summit, praise Trump for ‘bringing science back again’ | Climate Depot
- CFACT delivers “State of the Climate” report to UN COP 22 | CFACT
- Climate Models Don’t Work | Climatism
- Judith Curry: climate models can’t be trusted | Herald Sun
- MUST READ : Finally, Warmists Find a Real Threat — Quadrant Online
- “My Only Worry Is The Money” Says African Climate Negotiator | Climatism
- All Aboard The Marrakesh Express | Climatism
Climatism Related :
“Unreliable” energy update…
By Paul Homewood
A timely article from Booker today, which picks up on two of my recent posts:
I must apologise for having last week mistakenly reported that, despite the drive of the US in the Obama years to build ever more heavily subsidised wind and solar farms, the entire contribution of wind and solar to US electricity consumption is still only “less than 14 percent”.
Foolishly, I cited that figure only after a quick internet trawl. where it is quoted on various websites, including Wikipedia. Only when I subsequently referred to a more reliable source did I find that the figure was in fact absurdly exaggerated. All the US was actually getting last year for all the billions of dollars it has spent on wind and solar farms was just 5.4 percent of its electricity. Most of the rest of course came from those CO2-emitting…
View original post 202 more words
“After all, there’s no ‘C’ in NASA.”
And this quip becomes even more farcical when you drill down on the funding for ‘space’ Vs ‘climate’ over at NASA…
Via Mike Bastasch, Daily Caller:
“NASA’s budget includes more than $2 billion for its Earth Science Mission Directorate, which works to improve climate modeling, weather prediction and natural hazard mitigation. NASA’s other functions, such as astrophysics and space technology, are only getting a mere $781.5 and $826.7 million, respectively, in the budget proposal.
Spending on the [climate] directorate has increased by 63 percent over the last eight years, making it the largest and fastest growing budget of any NASA science program. Over the same time period, the general NASA budget grew only by 10.6 percent — just enough to account for inflation.”
It appears that ‘cooling the past and warming the present’, to fit the global warming narrative, is a winning formula in the squeeze for taxpayer funds.
Nice work Gavin Schmidt.
US President-elect Donald Trump is set to slash Nasa’s budget for monitoring climate change and instead set a goal of sending humans to the edge of the solar system by the end of the century, and possibly back to the moon.
Mr Trump, who has called climate change a “Chinese hoax”, is believed to want to focus the agency on far-reaching, big banner goals in deep space rather than “Earth-centric climate change spending”.
According to Bob Walker, who has advised Mr Trump on space policy, Nasa has been reduced to “a logistics agency concentrating on space station resupply and politically correct environmental monitoring”.
View original post 153 more words