This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

No Climate Emergency

This doesn't seem to appear in the Daily Mail or the BBC, I wonder why:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/29/scientists-tell-un-global-climate-summit-no-emerge/

There is no climate emergency
A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate
science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should
openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while
politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation
to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with
natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no
surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to
be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are
far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover,
they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the
fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is
beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global
plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and
suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as
damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations
destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.
Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly
oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches
emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to
provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.

https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ecd-letter-to-un.pdf


At last some people talking sense. After the relatively rapid rise of around 1°C between 1975 and 2000 in the Northern Hemisphere the temperatures have been relatively flat.

f95f77dc1ad4c0ab15046a656ee22cae-huge-hadcrut.jpg

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/figures/Figure11.png


We certainly need to reduce our consumption of finite resources and reduce our impact on the planet but focusing on CO2 is not the way to do it. Let's start with real pollutants that are directly harmful.


Best regards


Roger
Parents


  • Humans make decisions emotionally and then justify them rationally (video link below by Dr Karlyn Borysenko explains this process).  As I watched this video, I thought about the climate emergency discussion where much of the discussion follows this pattern, with hyperbole and extreme statements used to elicit an emotional response. Factual information that's available is used to rationalise wherever you end on the spectrum of positions (normally one of the ends). This causes division and tribal alignment which is clearly evident in much of the discussion and communication on this subject (Climate Emergency).

    As engineers, we should be able to use the rational part of the brain. We should be objective in addressing problems, to look at all the facts, the data (including completeness and integrity), to determine the boundary conditions, to develop alternative solution options, establish risk profiles which allow quality based decisions to be made, to arrive at achievable solutions, with acceptable cost benefit analyses which have stakeholder support and acceptable residual risk.

    An important part of this process is to listen, engage and understand the viewpoints and concerns of all stakeholders, to maintain respect for their concerns and behave with integrity in addressing them. 




    The attached youtube video link from Dr Karlyn Borysenko explains human decision process and gives an insight as to how better alignment can be achieved   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A1mg6pDnRg 
    •  

Reply


  • Humans make decisions emotionally and then justify them rationally (video link below by Dr Karlyn Borysenko explains this process).  As I watched this video, I thought about the climate emergency discussion where much of the discussion follows this pattern, with hyperbole and extreme statements used to elicit an emotional response. Factual information that's available is used to rationalise wherever you end on the spectrum of positions (normally one of the ends). This causes division and tribal alignment which is clearly evident in much of the discussion and communication on this subject (Climate Emergency).

    As engineers, we should be able to use the rational part of the brain. We should be objective in addressing problems, to look at all the facts, the data (including completeness and integrity), to determine the boundary conditions, to develop alternative solution options, establish risk profiles which allow quality based decisions to be made, to arrive at achievable solutions, with acceptable cost benefit analyses which have stakeholder support and acceptable residual risk.

    An important part of this process is to listen, engage and understand the viewpoints and concerns of all stakeholders, to maintain respect for their concerns and behave with integrity in addressing them. 




    The attached youtube video link from Dr Karlyn Borysenko explains human decision process and gives an insight as to how better alignment can be achieved   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A1mg6pDnRg 
    •  

Children
No Data