#IPCC

Never knew climate science was so precise

Forget the details of the report. Just logically, how is it that dealing with CO2 now will cause only 30-60cm sea level rises by 2100? If we do nothing it will be 61-110cm. It is almost like those surveys that ask you to select an age bracket – 25-34, 35-44, 45-64 etc…presumably if we go nuts on CO2 it will be 111-220cm?

Logically banks can’t possibly lend to house buyers that want to live by the sea. Nor will insurance companies allow owners to offset risk at a decent price.

A once a year by 2050 prediction is also pretty precise. Will these scientists issue a retraction in 31 years if the Bather’s Pavilion at Balmoral Beach is still offering breakfast, lunch and dinner? Will Mike Cannon-Brookes sell his Sydney Harbour front mansion?

It is a shame that the Obamas didn’t get a draft report before moving to the shoreline of Martha’s Vineyard.

Why does anyone put any stock into what the IPCC says anyway? Let’s look at the history of this unaccountable poorly governed UN body.

Himalayan Glaciers

In 2010, the IPCC admitted its 2007 prophecy that the Himalayan Glaciers would be devoid of snow by 2035 was unfounded. The IPCC had not based it off peer-reviewed papers but a WWF media interview with a scientist in 1999.

The IPCC said in a statement that it “refers to poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers. In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly… The IPCC regrets the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance.”

Sea Level Rises in The Netherlands

The WG2 IPCC climate bible noted, “The Netherlands is an example of a country highly susceptible to both sea-level rise and river flooding because 55% of its territory is below sea level”.

This sentence was provided by a Dutch government agency – the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, which published a correction stating that the sentence should have read “55 per cent of the Netherlands is at risk of flooding; 26 per cent of the country is below sea level, and 29 per cent is susceptible to river flooding.”

African Crop Yields

The IPCC Synthesis Report (i.e. summary) states: “By 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50%.” This is properly referenced back to chapter 9.4 of WG2, which says: “In other countries, additional risks that could be exacerbated by climate change include greater erosion, deficiencies in yields from rain-fed agriculture of up to 50% during the 2000-2020 period, and reductions in crop growth period” (Agoumi, 2003).

The Agoumi study wasn’t a peer-reviewed document.

It is noteworthy that chapter 9.4 continued with “However, there is the possibility that adaptation could reduce these negative effects (Benhin, 2006)…not all changes in climate and climate variability will be negative, as agriculture and the growing seasons in certain areas (for example, parts of the Ethiopian highlands and parts of southern Africa such as Mozambique), may lengthen under climate change, due to a combination of increased temperature and rainfall changes (Thornton et al., 2006). Mild climate scenarios project further benefits across African croplands for irrigated and, especially, dryland farms.”

IPCC SR15 Myths

The IPCC SR15 proposes that industry and taxpayers pay a carbon price of an average of $880/ton on carbon dioxide emissions in 2030, but the actual benefit, in terms of an assumed lower temperature, would only be worth at most $4. Accounting for natural climate change and benefits of CO2 fertilization, the proposed carbon tax will prevent a benefit of $8 per tonne CO2, for a total loss of $888 per ton CO2 mitigated.

The UNIPCC issued a special report for policymakers on Oct. 8, 2018 that was filled with statements of certainty about human-caused global warming.

Scientists published the Faulty Premises= Poor Public Policy on Climate report which listed the following

All climate models (simulations) used by the IPCC run ‘too hot’ versus observations. The computer simulations project future warming (thus being the rationale for global warming climate policies) show significantly higher temperatures than what is being observed. This suggests that most climate models ascribe too great an effect of warming (climate sensitivity) to carbon dioxide. This means the climate models should not be used to set public policy.

“The IPCC SR15 makes many recommendations regarding Carbon Dioxide Removal Systems (CDRS), most of which are untested and unvetted and proposed with no cost-benefit analysis. Such recommendations are contrary to the purpose of the IPCC and should be disregarded by policymakers. The IPCC should simply report on scientific findings.”

The proposed remedies of wind and solar increase carbon dioxide and cause warming. Rather than reduce fossil fuel use or aid in carbon dioxide reduction, wind and solar in fact require vast quantities of fossil fuels for productions, installation, and natural gas back-up – resulting in an increase in carbon dioxide.”

Dissenting scientists like Dr. Khandekar, did not agree with such claims of certainty.

The ‘Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas induced climate change’ report of 2000 notes, that,

A causal and unequivocal link between mean surface temperature increase and the anthropogenic greenhouse gas increase has not yet been established. The most probable cause of the mean surface temperature increase is considered to be a combination of internally and externally forced natural variability and anthropogenic sources. Significant uncertainty still exists relating the total (direct plus indirect) radiative forcing by anthropogenic aerosols (e.g. sulfate, black carbon, dust etc.). Recent studies suggest that the negative total radiative forcing by anthropogenic aerosols may offset the positive forcing by the greenhouse gases. Precipitation trends in different regions of the world do not present conclusive evidence about the intensification of the hydrologic cycle of the atmospheric-ocean system. There is still uncertainty relating trends in storm (tropical as well as extratropical) frequency in different parts of the world. Available climate data do not show any increasing trend in extreme weather events (e.g. extreme precipitation, extreme drought thunderstorms, winter blizzards) in any part of the world.

He still believes there is no change to this thesis.

Hadley HadCRUT4

The Hadley HadCRUT4 is the primary global temperature dataset used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to make its dramatic claims about “man-made global warming”.

Australian researcher John McLean audited the report.

Almost no quality control checks have been done: outliers that are obvious mistakes have not been corrected – one town in Columbia spent three months in 1978 at an average daily temperature of over 80 degrees C. One town in Romania stepped out from summer in 1953 straight into a month of Spring at minus 46°C. These are supposedly “average” temperatures for a full month at a time. St Kitts, a Caribbean island, was recorded at 0°C for a whole month, and twice!

Sea surface temperatures represent 70% of the Earth’s surface, but some measurements come from ships which are logged at locations 100km inland.”

For April, June and July of 1978 Apto Uto (Colombia, ID:800890) had an average monthly temperature of 81.5°C, 83.4°C and 83.4°C respectively.”

The monthly mean temperature in September 1953 at Paltinis, Romania is reported as -46.4 °C (in other years the September average was about 11.5°C).

At Golden Rock Airport, on the island of St Kitts in the Caribbean, mean monthly temperatures for December in 1981 and 1984 are reported as 0.0°C. But from 1971 to 1990 the average in all the other years was 26.0°C.
Meat-Eating & the IPCC

IPCC now wants to get involved in our diets. In the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) Chapter 7 goes on to talk about trade-offs and poverty, but there is no mention single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP), or cobalamin, or B12, or even the word “vitamin”.

SNPs can act as biological markers, helping scientists locate genes that are associated with the disease. When SNPs occur within a gene or in a regulatory region near a gene, they may play a more direct role in disease by affecting the gene’s function.

Meat is a good source of cobalamin (vitamin B12), which the body uses to make the myelin sheath on nerves.

A lack of B12 leads to

Demyelination of peripheral nerves, the spinal cord, cranial nerves and the brain, resulting in nerve damage and neuropsychiatric abnormalities. Neurological symptoms of vitamin B12 deficiency include numbness and tingling of the hands and feet, decreased sensation, difficulties walking, loss of bowel and bladder control, memory loss, dementia, depression, general weakness and psychosis. Unless detected and treated early, these symptoms can be irreversible.” — Zeuschner et al 2013

The Germans Greens are pushing a meat tax

I am in favour of abolishing the VAT reduction for meat and earmarking it for more animal welfare,” said Friedrich Ostendorf, agricultural policy spokesperson for the Greens.

IPCC & Chocolate

Half of the world’s chocolate is currently sourced from just two African countries: Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make it less suitable for cocoa production in the future. The research highlighted in the IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability report indicate that, under a “business as usual” scenario, those countries will experience a 3.8°F (2.1°C) increase in temperature by 2050 which could seriously impact cocoa production.

Claims that changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable…production has more than doubled in the past 3 decades.

98% of the models are wrong

The IPCC report which investigated models showed 98% have overestimated warming.
The Twelfth Session of Working Group I (WGI-12) was held from 23 to 26 September 2013 in Stockholm, Sweden. At the Session, the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (WGI AR5) was approved and the underlying scientific and technical assessment accepted.

Everything in the Working Group II report depends entirely on Working Group I and Working Group I depends solely on the climate data of which 98% have proven wrong.

Chapter Nine “Evaluation of Climate Models” in WGI-12 notes:

Most, though not all, models overestimate the observed warming trend in the tropical troposphere over the last 30 years and tend to underestimate the long-term lower stratospheric cooling trend.” {9.4.1, Box 9.2, Figure 9.8}

…In tropical regions, the models are too dry in the lower troposphere and too moist in the upper troposphere,” (p763)

Most climate model simulations show a larger warming in the tropical troposphere than is found in observational data sets” (e.g., McKitrick et al., 2010; Santer et al., 2013).

XR in Cornwall push a narrative that sea level could rise 70 metres then meltdown

Climate alarmists, Extinction Rebellion in Cornwall (XRiC), were pushing an article from Cornwall Live that suggested sea levels could rise 70 metres. It noted,

According to geologist Edmond Mathez of the American Museum of Natural History, if all the ice covering Antarctica, Greenland and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt, the sea level would rise 70 metres and cover all coastal cities.”

When digging a bit deeper, it turns out a curator in the Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences answered this question from Hannah in Year 6.

Will the world ever be all underwater because of all the ice melting?

Mathez replied,

Dear Hannah,

Thank you for your question. The simple answer is no. The whole world will never be underwater. But our coastlines would be very different.

If all the ice covering Antarctica, Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt, sea level would rise about 70 meters (230 feet). The ocean would cover all the coastal cities. And land area would shrink significantly. But many cities, such as Denver, would survive.

However, all the ice is not going to melt. The Antarctic ice cap, where most of the ice exists, has survived much warmer times.

The concern is that portions of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps may disappear. We do not know how much or how quickly this could happen, because we do not know exactly how it will happen.

That’s because the ice doesn’t just melt. Ice actually flows down valleys like rivers of water . The problem is that we do not completely understand the factors that control how rapidly the ice flows and thus enters the ocean.

One way to approach the problem of not understanding the process is to study how sea level changed in the past. Earth is nearly as warm now as it was during the last interglacial period, about 125,000 years ago. At that time, sea level was 4 to 6 meters (13-20 feet) higher. It seems that this higher sea level was due to the melting Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps.

Perhaps a similar sea-level rise is our future. We don’t know. We also don’t know how rapidly sea level could rise. Will a 4-meter (13-foot) increase take 200, 500, or even 1,000 years? This is a question that a number of scientists are now trying to answer by studying how ice moves.

So Extinction Rebellion Cornwall (XRiC) took umbrage at CM’s insistence they were chasing pagan gods and hadn’t bothered to read beyond the Cornwall Live article. Some XRiC respondents came back with the idea some are suffering psychological issues by living in fear of these prophecies. CM pointed them toward the IPCC survey conducted in 2010 on the processes and procedures in the formulation of the climate bibles.

The collected answers to the questionnaire are contained in 678 pages.

Here are some direct quotes:

some of the lead authors…are clearly not qualified to be lead authors.” (p.16)

There are far too many politically correct appointments, so that developing country scientists are appointed who have insufficient scientific competence to do anything useful. This is reasonable if it is regarded as a learning experience, but in my chapter…we had half of the [lead authors] who were not competent.” (p. 138)

The whole process…[is] flawed by an excessive concern for geographical balance. All decisions are political before being scientific.” (p. 554)

Half of the authors are there for simply representing different parts of the world.” (p. 296)

Lest anyone think that people from less affluent countries were being unjustly stereotyped, the person whose comments appear on page 330 agrees:

The team members from the developing countries (including myself) were made to feel welcome and accepted as part of the team. In reality, we were out of our intellectual depth as meaningful contributors to the process.

CM also pointed out that the same Cornwall Live website posted,

The data shows the most expensive postcode in Cornwall is PL29 3, which covers Port Isaac, where an average price of £383,750 was recorded last year. This is up 10% compared to 2017.”

It would seem that the people of Cornwall aren’t fleeing the coastline in panic.

XRiC has deleted the post. Melting snowflakes?

Poor kid

This is what happens when poor Greta Thunberg hasn’t got a script given to her by her captors. One would have thought with the Oscar winning performance of several days ago she would have the conviction to respond with a bit more fire and brimstone with respect to making demands of Trump.

It is so sad to see her exposed like this because in the end she is a vulnerable teenager who means well but is suffering immense harm being used as cannon fodder in the hyper-political snake pit.

How dare they. #setherfree #freegreta

Greta, the poster child for a dysfunctional education system

Greta.png

You have to hand it to the left. They truly have indoctrination down pat. While there is a sense of awe at the sheer number of kids who attended Friday’s protests around the world at the expense of school (in some cases even exams), 16yo Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, the poster child for ‘climate change’, has exposed how dysfunctional our educational system has become. Forget discipline. Dismiss reasoned discussion. Conform and get rewarded for it.

CM has always felt sorry for Greta’s exploitation. She typifies the style of propaganda used over generations. The way that the UN, EU or World Economic Forum hang off her every word. It is deeply embarrassing. Made worse by the hypocrisy of 1,500 private jets used to fly to hear her speak in Davos.

Many teachers and parents of these kids are no better. Often espousing patronizing and sanctimonious sermons about the intelligence of the youth today. Not to worry, Extinction Rebellion has even published a piece on hypocrisy. Thomas Sinclair wrote,

Someone who doesn’t know the evidence might perhaps be persuaded to review it. But someone who thinks I’m a hypocrite may suppose that I’ve reviewed the evidence and am acting on it — so she can skip the review herself and take my actions as her guide.” Take that!

He goes on,

However, XR can do better than the standard response. The most important point is this. There is no hypocrisyDriving to XR protests, or using vinyl banners, or eating a Pret sandwich at an XR roadblock — these are not hypocritical actions. Hypocrisy is a matter of preaching one thing but practising another. But what XR preaches is a radical change of the system within which we must make our choices, not of the choices we make within the system as it stands.

What infallible logic! How could we be so obtuse? Those kids CM found eating McDonald’s before the climate strike were completely aware of their actions. They were “highlighting” the problem of the fast-food chain’s utter disdain for the planet to serve food in single-use plastics and paper packaging. It was a cry to get McDonald’s to change its wicked ways. Or was it they were just oblivious to the fact that, while gorging on hamburgers, fries and thick shakes, were unable to fathom their own double standards. Lucky for them, Sinclair has a get out of jail free card. Who knew?

It wasn’t so long ago that a CIS study in Australia revealed that 58% of millennials had a favourable view of socialism. Unfortunately, 51% did not know who Chairman Mao was. Another 32% did not know Stalin and 42% hadn’t heard of Lenin. If we combine with “know but not familiar” with “don’t know” we see almost 80%, 66% and 74% respectively. Oh, how wonderful to learn in school about three men whose social policies led to the deaths of 10s of millions. Unbeknownst to them, many of their teachers follow the same Marxist mindset.

What more proof do you need when an RMIT senior lecturer tweeted he’d award full marks for 5% of the course for those that attended provided they sent in a selfie. Presumably, those that didn’t submit a selfie would be secretly docked marks. RMIT made a glib response to the professor’s tweet which went along the lines of defending the indefensible. Pathetic. He should be severely reprimanded or sacked for completely unprofessional conduct.

Corporations often complain about the difficulty in hiring the skills they need to grow. Shouldn’t they now be extra wary that the degrees awarded to those they are looking to hire have been issues on the basis of aligned participation, not academic effort? Qantas CEO Alan Joyce and Virgin Australia CEO Paul Scurrah might make noise about having to be big on social justice to attract the next generation but if they attend schools which openly support activism quite frankly they are all theirs! CM would prefer investing in companies that hire kids who got their education that cost $2.50 in late charges at the public library.

CM has written before on the slipping standards in Aussie education. Is it any wonder when a growing number of teachers are radical activists. Our education system needs a massive overhaul. Our ranks in maths, science and literacy have all been heading south. We aren’t teaching our kids that the real world out there is a touch place. Wrapping them in cotton wool will not serve them at all in later life. That will ironically be the real impact of chasing climate change agendas and the misguided policy that was enacted due to weak-willed authorities.

Although don’t get too excited about a sea change in thinking to fix this awful course. The latest 2019 OECD report has been captured by the warming cult, justifying worsening trends in education on shifts in society, even going so far as to quote (p.16) Decca Records rejecting The Beatles back in 1962 as evidence of how we can get it wrong.

Justifying – although not admitting – the slip (denoted as a “shift”) in education standards on climate change is insane in the extreme. Lucky for us there is a summary version written by the OECD. The full report is here. 479 pages of blather.

There are too many examples of schools around the globe folding to this Marxist nonsense. In the past, student bodies embracing Marxism as a fad were par for the course. Now the university faculties are the drivers. For example:

Posters from the University of San Francisco (uSF) point at white students so they appropriately check their privilege. Karl Marx may have recently turned 200 but his legacy lives and breathes in California. So much for universities being the cradle of free and open thinking.

The Inclusive Communications Task Force at the Colorado State University has introduced an appropriate language guide and it has deemed the words “America” and “Americans” might prove offensive to some and have discouraged their use on campus.

The University of Texas launched, “MasculinUT”, a program which was organized by the school’s counselling staff with a poster series encouraging students to develop a “healthy model of masculinity.” The program is built around “restrictive masculinity” and tries to encourage men to drop traditional gender roles to “act like a man”, be “successful” or “the breadwinner.”

Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University conducted a study to see if there is a correlation between toxic masculinity and climate change. His assumptions ran the line that men see environmentalism as more feminine and get triggered if forced to make ecological choices if they feel threatened.

The University of Melbourne allowed an artistic performance that required “paying” white customers access on the basis of signing an acknowledgement of white privilege. The $600mn+ taxpayer-funded University of Melbourne’s motto is Postera Cescam Laude, which is Latin for “We shall grow in the esteem of future generations.” It is not clear whether the founders of the UoM had Marxist theories at the forefront of their minds in 1853. Growing the esteem of future generations was not to come by cutting down those whose passions as individuals cause them to strive for greatness. Yet the radical leftists believe esteem comes, not from effort, but allocation.

Don’t think that the indoctrination begins in secondary or tertiary education. From tender ages, in the Democratic People’s Republic of Victoria, some educational apparatchiks believe a grandparent kissing their grandchild can violate them and can be considered assault. In what world does a grandparent showing affection to their own flesh and blood have incest on their minds? Most likely never.

It would seem to CM that the most important Royal Commission to be conducted is on our education system. From Safe School programs to universities, Australia’s long term future is being seriously impacted by utterly valueless indoctrination. We will not be the lucky country for much longer because this garbage is already seeping into corporate board rooms.

Note CM in no way thinks Greta Thunberg is associated with Nazis.

Albo moves from dumb to dumber

Image result for dumb and dumber
Oh boy! Here we go again. Adjusting targets to a pointless exercise to an even more irrelevant one, albeit at a massive net cost to all Aussies.
Aust Manuf.png
This is the trend of Australian energy price inflation and manufacturing jobs over the last two decades. Notice anything? A correlation of about 90%. Energy prices go up, manufacturing comes down. We have shed 250,000 manufacturing jobs in the last two decades. Green jobs have not replaced them. Not even 1/10th of the jobs lost as this chart from the ABS shows.
The trend is the same in Denmark, which is an even big renewables user. The correlation is even higher. Denmark has shed 200,000+ jobs following green madness. No green jobs haven’t offset this either.
Denmark.png
Is it a surprise that prices, where more renewable energy is used, are higher than those places that don’t? If it weren’t for the weak $A, these numbers would look even worse.
GEP.png
Labor leader Anthony Albanese thinks that shifting the focus away from 45% renewable by 2030 to net zero emissions by 2050 is a game-changer. Why can’t these politicians count or look at the experience at home and abroad? What is this obsession to take Australia’s 0.00001345% CO2 contribution to the atmosphere to zero? How many billions more should we spend for absolutely no return? Does he not realise that Australia has the third-highest clean energy spending per capita already? Why all the self-flagellation?

cleanenergy.png
Our per capita emissions are going down relative to many neighbours. Don’t be fooled by the Europeans either. Biomass (which is as dirty as lignite (brown coal)) gets special dispensation from the EU hacks if a tree is planted for every one burned. So even though the tree that is planted will take at least 50 years to be able to replace what was burnt, fear not, creative stats are ok in Brussels.
PercapCO2.png
Ahh, but Germany is the country we should all aspire to be, no? Well actually, no. In 2007 Germany forecast that 2020 residential electricity prices would be approximately 16 Eurocents. Today they trade at c.31 Eurocents. Merkel’s policies to phase out all nuke power after the Fukushima disaster. Der Spiegel, a normally left-leaning journal wrote in a two-part series. 

Part 1 – Germany Failure on the Road to a Renewable Future

“But the sweeping idea has become bogged down in the details of German reality. The so-called Energiewende, the shift away from nuclear in favour of renewables, the greatest political project undertaken here since Germany’s reunification, is facing failure. In the eight years since Fukushima, none of Germany’s leaders in Berlin have fully thrown themselves into the project, not least the chancellor. Lawmakers have introduced laws, decrees and guidelines, but there is nobody to coordinate the Energiewende, much less speed it up. And all of them are terrified of resistance from the voters, whenever a wind turbine needs to be erected or a new high-voltage transmission line needs to be laid out.”

Germany’s Federal Court of Auditors is even more forthright about the failures. The shift to renewables, the federal auditors say, has cost at least 160 billion euros in the last five years. Meanwhile, the expenditures “are in extreme disproportion to the results, Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller said last fall, although his assessment went largely unheard in the political arena. Scheller is even concerned that voters could soon lose all faith in the government because of this massive failure.

There is also such an irony when these mad green schemes encounter scourge from animal rights groups. Former Green’s leader Bob Brown knows the feeling,

“The bird of prey [red kite], with its elegantly forked tail, enjoys strict protection in Germany…Red kites are migratory, returning from the south in the spring, but they don’t return reliably every year. The mayor would have been happy if the bird had shown up quickly so its flight patterns could be analyzed and plans for the wind park adjusted accordingly. It would have been expensive, but at least construction of the project could finally get underway.

But if the bird doesn’t return, the project must be suspended. Spies has to wait a minimum of five years to see if the creature has plans for the nest after all. Which means the wind park could finally be built in 2024, fully 12 years after the project got underway.”

Part 2 – German Failure on the Road to a Renewable Future

An additional factor exacerbating the renewables crisis is the fact that two decades after the enactment of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), 20-year guaranteed feed-in tariffs will begin expiring next year for the first wind, solar and biomass facilities. Some of those who installed solar panels back then — often farmers and homeowners — are still receiving 50 cents for every kilowatt-hour they feed into the grid. Today, larger facilities receive just 5 cents per kilowatt-hour.

The state has redistributed gigantic sums of money, with the EEG directing more than 25 billion euros each year to the operators of renewable energy facilities. But without the subsidies, operating wind turbines and solar parks will hardly be worth it anymore. As is so often the case with such subsidies: They trigger an artificial boom that burns fast and leaves nothing but scorched earth in their wake.

That doesn’t include the 360,000 German households in energy poverty.

As Australia continues to expand the renewables portion of our power grid, the lessons from the Germans couldn’t be clearer – market distortions and misguided investments only lead to marginal results on the back of massive investment to stop something that can’t be controlled. German taxpayers have been swindled and Aussies are sleepwalking down the same path.

So Albo, the solution is simple. Do the math. Read about Germany’s beta testing of renewables and stop this crusade to prevent something that no matter what target you pick, zero will be the output. Just look at the price of energy relative to core CPI since we went renewables mad in 2000. That chart is not a vote winner.

cpi.png

The only hot air Albo needs to worry about is that emanating from the Labor Party policy room. Drop all of this group think.

Which Doctors or Witch Doctors? AMA needs to remove its head from its own backside

Ideology and medicine shouldn’t mix. The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has taken on the role of a tribal witch doctor. It is more worrying that the very people we are supposed to put our faith in on the operating table have such ridiculously unfounded views in a field that is off their patch. Moreover, its assessment is flatly wrong.

Have they got hard evidence to back the claims? Not even the cheerleaders among alarmists back their claims. Yet watch the media fall into line with this utter garbage.

Here are some of the AMA’s reasons below.

“Climate change will cause higher mortality and morbidity from heat stress.”

– The reality is that more people die from cold weather events than hot. According to a 2014 study by the CDC, approximately 1,300 deaths per year from 2006 to 2010 were coded as resulting from extreme cold exposure, and 670 deaths per year from extreme heat. FAIL.

“Climate change will cause injury and mortality from increasingly severe weather events.”

The ‘Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas induced climate change report of 2000 notes, that,

“A causal and unequivocal link between mean surface temperature increase and the anthropogenic greenhouse gas increase has not yet been established. The most probable cause of the mean surface temperature increase is considered to be a combination of internally and externally forced natural variability and anthropogenic sources. Significant uncertainty still exists relating the total (direct plus indirect) radiative forcing by anthropogenic aerosols (e.g. sulfate, black carbon, dust etc.). Recent studies suggest that the negative total radiative forcing by anthropogenic aerosols may offset the positive forcing by the greenhouse gases. Precipitation trends in different regions of the world do not present conclusive evidence about the intensification of the hydrologic cycle of the atmospheric-ocean system. There is still uncertainty relating trends in storm (tropical as well as extratropical) frequency in different parts of the world. Available climate data do not show any increasing trend in extreme weather events (e.g. extreme precipitation, extreme drought thunderstorms, winter blizzards) in any part of the world.FAIL

“Climate change will cause increases in the transmission of vector-borne diseases.”

A 2016 NIH report titled,  ‘Climate change effects on airborne pathogenic bioaerosol concentrations: a scenario analysis‘ noted,

The single receptor results showed that modelled concentrations were modified (on average decreased) several percentage points on average as a result of climate change. In general, the variables wind speed and global radiation were of most importance, by influencing atmospheric particle dilution. An increase in global radiation (and temperature) enhances vertical atmospheric mixing and thus results in lower surface concentrations. An increase in wind speed enhances horizontal spread, and thus, the concentration at a receptor point at the plume axis (as in our study) decreases. From our spatial analysis, we concluded that distribution of the area at risk, however, changed: in some areas, the seasonal-averaged concentrations decreased (up to 20 %)

…Given the fact that most human infections occurred in spring, the 2009 concentrations were not exceptional...”

We concluded that for four out of five scenarios the concentrations generally decrease as a result of increased global radiation, temperature and increased wind speeds, whereas for one scenario the concentrations generally increase. Nevertheless, the differences between and especially within seasons are large. Since coincidence of emission and specific meteorological conditions largely determines the actual exposure, additional investigations are required to further quantify the change in predicted concentrations of airborne pathogenic bioaerosolsby taking into account pathogen inactivation and more detailed probability functions on precipitation, snow and large-scale circulation.” FAIL

“Climate change will cause food insecurity resulting from declines in agricultural outputs.”

The IPCC Synthesis Report (i.e. summary) states: “By 2020, in some countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50%.”  This is properly referenced back to chapter 9.4 of WG2, which says:  “In other countries, additional risks that could be exacerbated by climate change include greater erosion, deficiencies in yields from rain-fed agriculture of up to 50% during the 2000-2020 period, and reductions in crop growth period” (Agoumi, 2003).

Agoumi study wasn’t a peer-reviewed document.

It is noteworthy that chapter 9.4 continued with “However, there is the possibility that adaptation could reduce these negative effects (Benhin, 2006)…not all changes in climate and climate variability will be negative, as agriculture and the growing seasons in certain areas (for example, parts of the Ethiopian highlands and parts of southern Africa such as Mozambique), may lengthen under climate change, due to a combination of increased temperature and rainfall changes (Thornton et al., 2006). Mild climate scenarios project further benefits across African croplands for irrigated and, especially, dryland farms.” 

The same goes for chocolate…

Half of the world’s chocolate is currently sourced from just two African countries: Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. According to the IPCC, rising temperatures and a relative reduction in rainfall could make it less suitable for cocoa production in the future. The research highlighted in the IPCC Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability report indicate that, under a “business as usual” scenario, those countries will experience a 3.8°F (2.1°C) increase in temperature by 2050 which could seriously impact cocoa production.

Claims that changes to the climate are also pushing cocoa-growing regions to higher altitudes in some parts of the world, which can make some crops unsustainable…production has more than doubled in the past 3 decades. FAIL

“Climate change will cause a higher incidence of mental ill-health.”

By opening its mouth the AMA would seemingly be assisting the business fortunes of psychologists. Perhaps the AMA should check into its own facilities.

Honestly, we must conclude that climate alarmism is in the final throes. With all these local councils declaring climate emergencies and now the AMA joining the RBA and APRA on climate activism, we should start to discount their opinions on their core subjects. Utterly pathetic.

Perhaps the AMA should demand that all of our hospitals are run off renewables with no baseload back up power. Gotta practice what it preaches!

Who’d a thunk?

Dr. Rex Fleming, a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) atmospheric scientist has broken his silence on the cabal running the show. He has left the administration citing,

– data was manipulated inside NOAA by numerous individuals under the Obama era. They changed ocean data, atmospheric data. They wouldn’t own up to weather stations which would give inflated data to support their warming.

– the American Meteorological Society (AMS), the American Geophysical Union (AGU), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) refuse to publish scientific papers from scientists (including Fleming) it considers “deniers“. Fleming was forced to go to Europe to have the 2018 paper peer-reviewed and published. So much for seeking balance.

– CO2 has risen because of warm temperatures. Not the other way around. 420,000 years of zero correlation of CO2 leading temperature. Can’t all of a sudden claim correlation of C02 leading temperature. Therefore it can’t be a cause.

– He said many scientists within NOAA agree that this is the truth yet are afraid to speak out. He said many scientists risked being fired for speaking out against the orthodoxy. This is why many are speaking out when they leave NOAA.

– more scientists are making no effort shifting away from anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW)because they are “in this groove of getting funds for huge, bigger computer systems to run these massive climate models. And they want their salaries to increase. They don’t want to change.”

Where have we seen this before? James Cook University bullying Professor Peter Ridd for not towing the party line? To have them lose a court case against him and to then double down by telling the judge he is wrong and spending another $600,000+ on a retrial.

The podcast can be found here.