Our Template Letter to Deluded Global Warming Journalists
As ever more scientists affirm Earth is now into a natural cooling cycle, some mainstream media outlets are still stuck on the discredited imaginary man-made global warming narrative. In response to reader request, we outline below the scientific evidence in an open letter intended for those ill-informed journalists. Feel free to share.
Dear mainstream journalist,
Why do you and your colleagues continue to make the crass error of reporting naturally occurring climate change to mean “man-made climate change”? The “man-made” part of it is all too often implicitly tagged on by climate alarmists with no supporting proof; most people do not even notice this. The unwitting are thereby led to conclude that “unnatural” human emissions are causing all manner of hot weather, cold weather, dry weather, wet weather – in fact, anything out of the norm (whatever that is) becomes a human-caused problem!
Why do you and your colleagues continue to make the crass error of reporting naturally occurring climate change to mean “man-made climate change”? The “man-made” part of it is all too often implicitly tagged on by climate alarmists with no supporting proof; most people do not even notice this. The unwitting are thereby led to conclude that “unnatural” human emissions are causing all manner of hot weather, cold weather, dry weather, wet weather – in fact, anything out of the norm (whatever that is) becomes a human-caused problem!
To make the story more “authoritative” we see, ad naseum, the media referring to a supposed “consensus” of climate scientists who not only believe in this nonsense, but their very pay checks depend on sustaining the fallacy. And let us remember that science operates in a continuum and each scientific consensus is eventually overturned; lest we forget that human understanding of our natural world is constantly evolving. How else would we have moved forward from Ptolemy’s universe where the earth was at the centre of it and which “consensus” stood for 1400 years.
History is replete with true scientists who have either lost their lives – or their freedom – if they went against the “consensus.” Please take on board that neither I nor anyone who protests against the “man-made” label of climate change will tell you that climate change is not happening. Such a phenomenon is par for the course for our planet and has been such for 4.5 billion years.
Just ask any alarmist academic to provide you with just one scientifically justified fact proving carbon dioxide (CO2) drives climate change, this trace gas comprises in total just 0.04{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of our atmosphere of which a miserly 3{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of that is attributed to human activity (see the official US figures at the foot of this letter).
Contrary to what you may believe, Nature desperately needs more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, not less. In fact we are living in a low-level CO2 era (see figure right).
It is not possible that there are any environmental advantages in reducing this gas of life! Indeed, are you aware that the breath leaving your body has a carbon dioxide content of around 40,000 ppm? (compare that to the teeny-weeny 350ppm in the atmosphere that has alarmists petrified)
It is not possible that there are any environmental advantages in reducing this gas of life! Indeed, are you aware that the breath leaving your body has a carbon dioxide content of around 40,000 ppm? (compare that to the teeny-weeny 350ppm in the atmosphere that has alarmists petrified)Earth’s climate has always been changing, throughout recorded history going back hundreds of thousands of years; the next graph (below right) is a snapshot of just the past 11,000 years.
Now, in 2014, the ice at the Poles is not melting dramatically (quite the opposite). Polar Bears are not becoming extinct (quite the opposite) sea levels are not rising alarmingly (quite the opposite) and so on with each and every scenario presented as “proof” of “man-made climate disruptions”.
A paper published January 21st, 2014, in Quaternary Science Reviews reconstructs storm activity in Iceland over the past 1,200 years and finds storminess and extreme weather variability was far more common during the Little Ice Age in comparison to the Medieval Warm Period and the 20th century.’
There is not one shred of evidence that underscores any sea level rise. Can’t you see how you have been stealthily enlisted to further the unfounded alarm?
If NGO and government-sponsored scaremongers stopped their agenda of spewing out climate nonsensical alarm stories, they would have to shut up shop because their funding would stop instantly. It seems to me that those who love being climate alarmists live in a rarefied academic echo chamber of self congratulatory head nodders hidden from the chaotic and ceaselessly changing real world.
History tells us all previous warming periods were highly beneficial to humanity and these cyclical warming and cooling periods have (and will) show up regularly throughout geologic time, and mankind has little, if any, measurable impact.
A new peer-reviewed paper published in Science finds ‘the radiative forcing (that is, the perturbation to Earth’s energy budget) caused by human activities to be highly uncertain, making it difficult to predict the extent of global warming.’
Even that latest report does not go far enough in admitting the truth, which is that the entire concept of “radiative forcing” does not exist in reality – it is a figment of the imagination, needed to make computer programmes “blame” carbon dioxide!
Journalists are not ordinarily trained in the sciences, so we can’t expect you to cogitate on such issues. But you can report in a more balanced fashion on what is finally being revealed piece by piece as an emergent and natural jigsaw picture of global cooling – not warming! (see graph below right).
Sadly, too much money rides on the entire gravy train that has been created by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to try and stop it overnight.
As I stated in reply to a mainsteam news article last week:
Taking into account that all of the carbon dioxide in the air has no influence on climate change, let alone the 3{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} that humans may have added, there is no need for one more turbine anywhere. Taking also into account the immense pollution caused in Mongolia and China during the mining of the special minerals and the entire manufacturing process, there is nothing green at all about these machines. When all aspects are analysed, they actually add carbon dioxide, but of course not in green, clean England! The people happy to have a turbine in their back garden have not one clue about the damage caused in far-flung countries, nor the direct damage to the eco-systems within which these machines are erected. Have you ever thought about how to recycle them? That’s another headache for future generations. Wake up to reality, realise that climate change is perfectly natural and that we humans have no influence upon the one and only true climate-driver: the sun.
Knowing as absolute scientific fact that the only climate driver on our earth is our sun, you can surely comprehend that once the heat from our sun has reached our earth, it is downhill all the way and only cooling can occur? Nothing at all can ever increase that solar power, if only we could! Reduced cooling does not equal warming either.
Our magical sun has begun a period of unprecedented behaviour and is in the process of going quiet. Pray it stops and reverses itself because the best solar scientists in the world predict a rather prolonged period of global cooling.
Below right is the up-to-date NOAA produced graphic of the current solar cycle (source: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
Spot the huge difference between the previous and current cycle and you’ll instantly see why it was warmer at the end of the last century and why it’s been cooling ever since. It’s not rocket science but those who wear blinkers will not even look at this!
Next time you report on a climate story, do some research and instead of “just reporting what happened” add some words to the effect that the science is by no means settled and that no factual evidence exists to link any “climate disruption” to the total amount of carbon dioxide, let alone the 3{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} added by human activity (that’s a UN IPCC given number by the way, see attachment).
“The difference between manmade (“bad”) and natural (“good”) CO2 … exists in the minds of politicians, bureaucrats and scientists who understand the principle of a dollar sign in front of a number.” – Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser
“[Barack Obama,] by declaring an official and unassailable scientific position on “climate change” – it is now career threatening for any government scientist to produce evidence to the contrary. Undoubtedly the most disgusting anti-science event in US history. Climate change is a completely vague, nebulous, indefinable concept, so Obama can use his decree as an excuse to purge anyone who doesn’t fall in line.” from http://stevengoddard.
From a letter to the NY Times by Dr Martin Hertzberg: “Science is indeed “in crisis” because of the “selective use of data” because of the “confirmation bias” whereby “we seek out information that confirms what we already believe.” Unfortunately, he neglects to mention the most egregious example: the “global warming / climate change” theory that attributes changes in weather to human emission of CO2. There is not one iota of reliable evidence for that theory, yet it has been accepted by many scientific organizations, government agencies, mainstream media (including the Times) and even President Obama: all because of their biases, and their complete absence of self doubt. As a result, billions of dollars are being wasted in the pursuit of the phantom in the sky: the so-called “greenhouse effect” – a pure fiction.”
From today’s (February 3, 2014) BBC lead story: “Education Secretary Michael Gove is warned by a former Ofsted chief inspector to engage with critics and not surround himself only with “yes men”.” Climate “scientists” and editors in the mainstream media would do well with the same advice.
Best regards,
Hans Schreuder
Retired Analytical Chemist
Retired Analytical Chemist
————–
US government figures of ‘greenhouse gas’ concentrations in the atmosphere:
Trackback from your site.