Okjökull lost glacier title in 2014. UN admits not due to climate change. Media knows better.


The Okjökull glacier used to stretch six square miles (15 square kilometres). Now environmentalists have dedicated a plaque to mourn its death. Sadly, it has been in the morgue (lost its title as a glacier) since 2014. Why weren’t the plaque makers firing up the molten brass to fill the die-cast 5 years prior? All about the narrative, not the science behind glaciers. CM understands why Iceland’s Prime Minister Katrin Jakobsdottir might want to virtue signal in this way but why did it require UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson to burn fossil fuels and fly all the way to morally preen? This is so typical of the obsession to misrepresent reality.

According to the UN Chronicle, “The sudden surging of glaciers is not related to climatic fluctuations, and surges can take place even at times when glaciers retreat. This is the usual behaviour of some glaciers and can not be evidence of an impending surge… unfortunately, direct observations of a change in the movement of a glacier at the onset of a surge are still very rare, and the causes for surges are not yet clear…It should be emphasized that the problem of climate change is extremely difficult to understand, and it has still not been possible to know what factors in the past decades — natural or anthropogenic — have caused the warming. There are still many uncertainties in solving this problem. IPCC estimates are rather wide in their range of accuracy and, therefore, cannot predict with confidence…at least not in the coming decades and centuries.

In Greenland, the Jakobshavn glacier around 2012 had been retreating about 1.8 miles and thinning nearly 130 ft per annum. In the past two years, according to a study in Monday’s Nature Geoscience, it started growing by the same amount. “A natural cyclical cooling of North Atlantic waters likely caused the glacier to reverse course“, said study lead author Ala Khazendar, a NASA glaciologist on the Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project. Khazendar and colleagues say “this coincides with a flip of the North Atlantic Oscillation — a natural and temporary cooling and warming of parts of the ocean that is like a distant cousin to El Nino in the Pacific.

Approximately 11% of  Iceland’s total area of roughly 100,000 km2 is covered by glaciers. Vatnajökull is the largest glacier mass in Europe. It covers an area of roughly 8,000 km2, and is 950-1000 m where it is thickest. Its mean thickness is a little less than 500 m, and the total ice volume of Vatnajökull is probably in the order of 3,300 km3.

Glaciers on Iceland had their maximum Little Ice Age extension over 1890-1920. Glacier variations in Iceland since 1930 showed a clear response to variations in climate during the period: Most non-surging glaciers retreated strongly during the early half of the monitoring period, following the warm climate between 1930 and 1940. A cooling climate after 1940 led to a slowing of the retreat and many glaciers started to advance around 1970. Warming climate since 1985 led to an increased number of retreating glaciers. The estimated coverage loss per year is about 0.2% overall, which amounts to 20-30 km2 becoming ice-free every year. If the present trend continues, most glaciers on Iceland will have melted away within 500 years.

Major surging glaciers of Vatnajökull. Figure source: Björnsson et al. (2003)

A surge-type glacier experiences a dramatic increase in flow rate, which can be 10-100 times greater than normal flow rates. The velocities of surge-type glaciers can exceed 100 m/day. About 26 Icelandic glaciers are known to surge.  Glacier variations in Iceland have been recorded systematically since the 1930s.

One of the best known surging glaciers in Iceland is Brúarjökull which has had major surges in 1810, 1890 and 1963/64.  During the 1890 surge, the ice margin advanced about 10 km over a period of few months. Subsequent to the surge, the ice front became largely stagnant and the glacier retreated until it surged again in 1963-1964.

So while the mainstream media has got the desired effect of whipping up hysteria of receding glaciers caused by human-created CO2 based global warming, there is little effort to reference their own sources, such as the alarmist UN. How ironic it is that the UN doesn’t have any confidence in why these things happen yet the media seemingly does as long as it fits a narrative.

The plaque says 415ppm of C02. That’s right. CO2 is 0.0415% of the atmosphere. CM hopes his grandkids look at me one day and say, “why couldn’t people do simple mathematical fractions?

BoM strikes again


Jo Nova has an interesting piece which describes the shameless behaviour of our Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). She notes,

The Streaky Bay information (site 018079) tells us it opened in 1865 but the site only has monthly data from 1926 and daily data from an even shorter period. The rest presumably hasn’t been digitized yet. As best as I can tell, the station metadata appear to mark this site as being at the post office from 1865 to 2018, and record the ground cover as becoming asphalt in July 1987. That means for 31 years the Australian Bureau of Meteorology knew the site was sitting on hot bitumen and couldn’t be bothered to move it? The BOM gets more than a million dollars a day, and claims there’s a dire crisis running, and they don’t even care enough to measure climate change properly? They’re not even trying.

If you click on the Streaky Bay information site link above you’ll be directed to a “page not found.”

Jo Nova demands a Royal Commission (RC) into the BoM. CM agrees. If they have nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear. People might claim it is a waste of money to host a RC on the BoM but the savings of that investment would far outweigh the billions spent on poorly derived data-driven expenditure on renewables.

Toxic males and older folk still prefer Brexit to climate change

Activist group Christian Aid has published a survey of 2,072 people across representative age, gender, region and socioeconomic background to tell us that 71% of people care about the “long term” impacts of climate change than Brexit. 60% of people said that the UK government isn’t doing enough on climate change. Although looking at the questions in the ComRes survey we find when the word long term is removed it falls to 49%. Those damned toxic males make it 44% agreeing and 48% disagreeing with climate change being more pressing than Brexit in the short run. Don’t mention the older people! What do they know!? If Brexit occurs they’ll have stolen our “futures” twice!

Then by region, those pesky Northern Irelanders don’t think climate change is as important as Brexit. The double-barreled snobs in the South West are a given to be in favour of leaving the EU.

As can be seen from the Christian Aid website, it is an alarmist organization pleading its followers to bully banks into ending finance to fossil fuel industries.  HSBC is the main target.

When the next general election comes, CM thinks that Brexit will be given priority to climate. The EU elections proved that. Now that Corbyn has gone back on his word on Brexit and Boris is a “leaver” one imagines that the results of this survey will be disproven at the ballot box.

Peak climate change hysteria reached?

We must be near the top of climate change hysteria. A new report released by David Spratt and Ian Dunlop, titled, ‘Existential climate-related security risk: A scenario approach‘ points to climate Armageddon, which reads like an aggregation of every junk prediction ever made rolled into one.

The report suggests in its 2050 scenario,

While sea levels have risen 0.5 metres by 2050, the increase may be 2–3 metres by 2100, and it is understood from historical analogues that seas may eventually rise by more than 25 metres. 35% of the global land area and 55% of the global population are subject to more than 20 days a year of lethal heat conditions, beyond the threshold of human survivability.

Most regions in the world see a significant drop in food production and increasing numbers of extreme weather events, including heat waves, floods and storms. Food production is inadequate to feed the global population and food prices skyrocket, as a consequence of a one-fifth decline in crop yields, a decline in the nutrition content of food crops, a catastrophic decline in insect populations, desertification, monsoon failure and chronic water shortages, and conditions too hot for human habitation in significant food-growing regions. The lower reaches of the agriculturally-important river deltas such as the Mekong, Ganges and Nile are inundated, and significant sectors of some of the world’s most populous cities — including Chennai, Mumbai, Jakarta, Guangzhou, Tianjin, Hong Kong, Ho Chi Minh City, Shanghai, Lagos, Bangkok and Manila — are abandoned. Some small islands become uninhabitable. 10% of Bangladesh is inundated, displacing 15 million people.

Even for 2°C of warming, more than a billion people may need to be relocated and In high-end scenarios, the scale of destruction is beyond our capacity to model, with a high likelihood of human civilisation coming to an end.

If that is not pathetic enough the forward, written by a retired admiral, cues the violins,

David Spratt and Ian Dunlop have laid bare the unvarnished truth about the desperate situation humans, and our planet, are in, painting a disturbing picture of the real possibility that human life on earth may be on the way to extinction, in the most horrible way…

…Stronger signals still are coming from increasing civil disobedience, for example over the opening up of the Galilee Basin coal deposits and deepwater oil exploration in the Great Australian Bight, with the suicidal increase in carbon emissions they imply. And the outrage of schoolchildren over their parent’s irresponsibility in refusing to act on climate change.

Note Spratt & Dunlop do not believe the 2050 scenario is “far from an extreme scenario.

The sad thing is that global crop yields have never been better, the IPCC has had to backtrack to admit little or no confidence that storms, floods or any other catastrophe are out of the realms of normality. Perhaps the most telling quote in the report is,

and climate scientists admitting to depression as they consider the “inevitable” nature of a doomsday future and turn towards thinking more about family and relocation to “safer” places, rather than working on more research.

Perhaps that depression comes from the fact that nearly all the models have been shown to be duds. So many predictions have shown the complete opposite.

CM still believes that climate scientists need to have an independent regulator that ensures that any malfeasance or fraud by the science community results in heavy fines and jail terms. Whistleblower protections should be put in place. Provide a 6-mth amnesty for scientists to admit any wrongdoing. After that, they are on the hook. Then watch all those prophecies get scaled back to paint a  2050 picture of absolute wonder.

Oh, the irony

Oh the irony. Poor young Greta Thunberg was invited to speak at Davos. She may have wanted her audience to panic but it might have been better for her to focus outside her window on landing so she could see the utter hypocrisy of those she was addressing and their chosen mode of transport – 1,500 private jets.

Still, like the UN COP summit just past, we are supposed to believe that a 16yo has all the answers. Why go to university? What is the value in further education if a kid not even out of high school is smarter than all the adults in the room?

What a farce. The word “panic” says it all. It is hard to know who to believe. Thunburg? Alexandria Ocasio Cortez has only given us 12 years to live. Even The Pentagon wrote a report in 2003 that suggested by 2020 climate change would cause nuclear war, famine and natural disasters costing millions of lives. Not long to go til we get confirmation.

COP24 – checking cash, corruption and cars

It should come as no surprise that the COP24 summit is a time to put the money where the mouth is. Look at the numbers of the delegates from Africa to stake their claim of the wealth redistribution. Guinea has sent the biggest delegation of 406 people. In 2016 the country received over $10.7mn in climate grants. DR Congo’s 237 delegates garnered $45 mn in aid for climate mitigation projects according to the OECD. The Ivory Coast received $114 million in 2016 for environmental aid. Indonesia got $250 million in climate related aid in the same year.  Poland can be forgiven being the host nation to be 3rd place. It receives zip, much like the US and Australia. The COP summits are nothing more than networking events to collect cash from virtue signaling Western governments.


Putting that in context of the representation amongst all delegates to their representative population, Guinea is at 15.5x. America at 0.1x. Guinea is 86 people lighter than in 2017. The Ivory Coast had halved its delegates on the previous summit.


One has to question how efficiently these millions given away get to be spent on the intent. Take a look at Transparency International’s global 2017 corruption index. 180 is the worst. 1 is the best. Note the correlation of delegates attending COP24 to those countries with a higher prevalence of corruption?


There is a touch of irony that the transport recommendations to/from Katowice airport made by the UNFCCC are all diesel vehicles. Not an EV in sight. Surely there was an opportunity to team up with an EV maker to co–sponsor the event? Did the 7,331 observers going to the summit pick up on this? Why didn’t they take advantage of the virtual attendance technology that was available? Better to be there and enjoy the banquets and political graft.


Live free and negotiate

Sir David’s 22,000 disciples won’t be able to sustain frequent flyer mile status

Yes Sir David Attenborough, we’re doomed if we look at history of the very people in place to save us. Not withstanding the 22,000 climate change disciples who have flown to Katowice, Poland to pay homage at the altar of the UNIPCC to cling on to each other hearing about their inevitable extinction. What a shame that instead of embracing technology and live-streaming COP24 to help us mitigate impending disaster, government funded frequent flyer mile status of climate apparatchiks takes precedence to saving us from all of these dangerous CO2 emissions.

Apart from the 100% certainty of me being screened for explosives at Sydney Airport (yet again today), the other is that the growth in air travel suggests that more and more people are happy to save the planet, provided that someone else offsets on their behalf. CM has long argued this position. Our consumption patterns dictate the “true” state of care of the environment. It hasn’t stopped SUV sales dead in their tracks and last year the IATA forecast that the number of airline passengers is set to DOUBLE by 2030.  Hardly the actions of those frightened by climate change.

Oh but you can offset your carbon footprint! In its 2017 Annual Report, Qantas boasts,

We have the world’s largest airline offset program and have now been carbon offsetting for over 10 years. In 2016/17, we reached three million tonnes offset.”

Carbon calculators tend to work on the assumption of 0.158kg CO2/passenger kilometre.

In the last 10 years Qantas has flown around 1 trillion revenue passenger kilometres. While the literature in the annual report denotes one passenger offsets every 53 seconds, the mathematical reality is simple – 2% of miles are carbon offset. So that means that 98% of people couldn’t care less. Would dispensing with frequent flyer programs cut emissions? These loyalty programs by their very nature encourage more travel. The more you fly the more you can fly for free!  Surely the IPCC should scream for a ban here. Dispense with first, business and premium economy to maximise passenger loads each flight. Apologies for the preamble.

While the US is not a signatory to Paris, 19 of the G20 are. The irony is that the non-signatory nation has seen its total emissions fall while many of the others have not. What value the ink on a pledge? No sooner had President Macron thrown stones at America, that he’s backed down and postponed a fuel tax hike for 6 months to save his city from burning down. There it is in a nutshell. We’re told if we don’t act now we’re doomed. So 6 months is a long time in “immediate” speak. What we do know this is classic smoke and mirrors by Macron. In 6 months the fuel tax will be all but forgotten. Virtue signaling Exhibit A scrapped. Why doesn’t anyone in the media pick on China? It has promised to increase emissions out to 2030 and is a signatory.

Sir David should get cold chills lifting a rock on the recent saga surrounding the NATO signatories where we can learn how worthless pen strokes can be. In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending. This guideline, according to NATO,  “principally serves as an indicator of a country’s political will to contribute to the Alliance’s common defence efforts.” In 2017, only 5 of the 28 members outside the US have met the 2% threshold – Greece, Estonia, UK, Romania & Poland in that order. Despite Greece’s economic problems elsewhere, it manages to honour the deal. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said “the majority [not all] of allies now have plans to do so by 2024.” 3 more are expected to hit the target in 2018. So for all the good will in the world, is POTUS wrong to call the other 19 members slackers that ride off the US taxpayer when so many of them are only likely to hit the target 18 years after ‘committing’ to it?

Alas, who doesn’t want to breathe clean air? The question is once all of the hysteria of 100m sea rises, forest fires (sharply down from 70 years ago & 90% caused by arson or accidents), hurricanes (nothing extraordinary in the data to show increases in ferocity) or sinking islands (sorry 80% of Pacific atolls/islands are stable or rising) are properly analysed what is the most efficient way to get there? Even Turkey wants to be downgraded to a developing nation in order to benefit from wealth redistribution on climate.

What a masterstroke if signatories to Paris are prepared to take on America’s share of saving the planet. American taxpayers can feel happy in the knowledge that other nations are paying for their NATO commitments by rebating them with tax credits on climate, all the while ruining their domestic competitiveness along the way.  Why does Trump need to Make America Great Again, when the majority of nations are prepared to do it for him? Economist Paul Krugman shouldn’t be calling climate skeptics “sinners” but “saints”