Dutch Geologist Calls Climate Science A “Mass Hysteria” …”Historians Will Shake Their Heads In Disbelief”

Book review: “The Fable of a Stable Climate”..click on image to enlarge.
By Dr. Hans Labohm
(Edited/condensed by P. Gosselin)

Gerrit van der Lingen has recently published a fascinating book, “The Fable of a Stable Climate, the writings and debates of a climate realist.

Most of the public information about the climate comes from scientists who studied the weather and weather processes and who consider temperature data of 150 years already a long period. For geologist and paleoclimatologist van der Lingen this is only a heartbeat in the geological history, which forms the only correct context for judging the present climate developments.

Ideology vs pure science

While studying climate change in the past van der Lingen realised that the present belief in man-made catastrophic global warming caused by CO2 emissions is not supported by the science and that it seems the debate is one between ideology and pure science.

The first chapter of his book an overview giving a clear overview of the climate debate, with all its high and low points. It draws attention to important participants, protagonists as well as antagonists. What really surprises Gerrit van der Lingen is how it is possible that intelligent people have been taken in by the AGW hypothesis and seem to have lost all sense of reality as a consequence.

British science delegation misbehaviour

One salient detail in the book pertains to the Russian position in relation to the Kyoto Protocol. The Russians had a few questions on which they never received an answer. In 2004, they decided to organise a climate conference in Moscow, independently of the UN IPCC climate panel, and with the co-operation of a number of climate sceptics. At the end of this conference, Andrei Illarionov, then economic advisor of president Putin, presented his impressions.

Yuri Antonovich and I have mentioned the fact that this is the first seminar of its kind that we have managed to arrange and it was accidental. Over almost a year we have repeatedly asked our foreign partners who advocate the Kyoto Protocol and who insist that Russia should ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and we have invited them to meet and discuss these issues, present arguments and counter-arguments and discuss them jointly. But we have not received any reply for a year. These people persistently refused to take part in any discussion.

Nine months ago, at an international climate change conference in Moscow, ten questions concerning the essence of the Kyoto Protocol and its underlying theory were submitted to the IPCC. We were told that the reply would be given within several days. Nine months have passed since then but there has been no reply, even though we have repeated our inquiries on these and the growing number of other related questions.

Instead of getting replies to our questions, we kept on hearing that replies did not matter. What was important is that whether or not Russia trusts Britain, the European Union and the countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol and that have been exerting unprecedented pressure on Russia to ratify it. This is why it was so important for us to arrange a real meeting and a real discussion of real problems with the participation of foreign scientists who have different views in order not to stew in one’s own juice, as Yuri Antonovich put it, but to hear the arguments not only of our Russian scientists but also the arguments and counter-arguments from scientists in other countries.

We did get such an opportunity and over the past two days we heard more than 20 reports, we held detailed discussions, and now we can say that a considerable number of the questions we formulated and raised have been somewhat clarified, just as some other questions have.”

Andrei Allarionov continued describing in detail the misbehaviour of the British delegation under the leadership of Sir David King, then the most important advisor of the British government, who did his utmost to sabotage the meeting, among others by requiring that climate sceptics not be allowed to present their presentations, and by stalking out of the meeting.

Ideology, not science

Illarionov compared the AGW with an ideology:

The next point brings us directly to the Kyoto Protocol, or more specifically, to the ideological and philosophical basis on which it is built. That ideological base can be juxtaposed and compared … with man-hating totalitarian ideology with which we had the bad fortune to deal during the 20th century, such as National Socialism, Marxism, Eugenics, Lysenkoism and so on. All methods of distorting information existing in the world have been committed to prove the alleged validity of these theories. Misinformation, falsification, fabrication, mythology, propaganda. Because what is offered cannot be qualified in any other way than myth, nonsense and absurdity.”

The Moscow climate conference leaves no doubt that the Russian Academy of Sciences cannot be considered as supporters of the AGW dogma – a thesis that is part of the standard repertoire of the disinformation by climate alarmists.

“Rubbish in – gospel out”

The book also looks at all important themes of the climate debate are discussed in short, clear analyses, and all allegations of the climate alarmists are tested against measurements and observations, and are refuted. In the end all warming hysteria is not based on science, but only on non-validated computer models. As is often said: Rubbish in – gospel out.

At the end of the book, Gerrit van der Lingen sighs:

When future historians will be studying the present global mass hysteria about alleged catastrophic man-made global warming (MMGW), they will most likely shake their heads in total disbelief. They may well compare it with other such historic irrational hysterias, like the tulipomania in Holland in the 17th century. […]

The belief that human emissions of carbon dioxide cause, or will cause catastrophic global warming is a […] totalitarian belief. It does not allow ‘critical discussion’. Those scientists who try are vilified. Over the years I collected the following abuses: ‘climate change deniers’, ‘cashamplified flat-earth pseudo scientists’, ‘the carbon cartel’, ‘villains’, ‘cranks’, ‘refuseniks lobby’, ‘polluters’, ‘a powerful and devious enemy’, ‘profligates’. The list is endless. […]

By saying that the science of climate change is ‘settled’ and not open to further discussion, clearly shows that the belief in man-made global warming is not based on proper science, but is a neo-Marxist, intolerant ideology. It is anti-science, anti-capitalist, anti-democracy, anti-growth, anti-humanity, anti-progress.”

All in all, “The Fable of a Stable Climate” shows a wide and solid knowledge of the subject. Moreover Gerrit van der Lingen has the talent to very clearly explain the complicated problems, which make his writings very accessible for a broad public. In other words: his book reads like a riveting novel.

The book has 418 pages and many illustrations and graphs, as well as extensive reference lists, and is available in both paperback and Kindle, can be ordered at www.book2look.com.


37 responses to “Dutch Geologist Calls Climate Science A “Mass Hysteria” …”Historians Will Shake Their Heads In Disbelief””

  1. Henning Nielsen

    There really is no mystery at all; humans have a strong need for something to believe in, and with the general demise of religion as well as political ideology -in the west, that is- CAGW just happens to be a very handy ersatz-solution. A bit of religion, a bit of politics, a whole lot of good intentions by the congregation, a very lage amount of money, it is quite simply perfect.

    A cyncial person might thank the heavens that we did not fall for something even more sinister this time.

    1. DirkH

      CO2AGW is a brand, a movement, a product that is sold using Polar Bear mascots and 100 year old psychological marketing. Best proof: A few years back Merkel delighted in being called “The Climate Chancellor”. She has been educated in propaganda in the FDJ, the youth org in the DDR.
      ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel : she claims she was responsible for “cultural activities”; contemporary witnesses say she was Secretary for Agitation and Propaganda – amazing that the German “press” never brings this up. )
      She knows the value of a movement-brand.

      1. yonason

        “Merkel … claims she was responsible for “cultural activities”; contemporary witnesses say she was Secretary for Agitation and Propaganda” – DirkH

        Good Grief! She was a kind of “community organizer?!” That would explain a lot.

        1. max

          It explains everything:

          She was on the way to higher office in the ex DDR (GDR). As AGITPROP official coming out of the FDJ movement, she was earmarked for it. Remember: She was born in Hamburg (Germany West) and then, with her parents, moved to East Germany at a time when East Germans risked their lives to flee this Communist prison she had no problem calling home until the ‘Wende’, meaning: no principles, no scruples to ‘adjust’ quickly – and reach the highest office in her erstwhile ‘enemy’ territory.

          ‘Wir schaffen das’ (we can master – better than ‘do’ – it) – even if the roof over her head caves in. That’s what they ‘produced’ in the East: Stubborn Apparatchiks, who would never admit being wrong, change their mind.

          I rest my case and leave further analysis of ‘Mutti’ to you.

    2. Colorado Wellington


      You are right that the spiritual void has to be filled and people will stuff something in there no matter what. The apocryphal Father Brown is alleged to have said that a man who won’t believe in God will believe in anything.

      I just don’t think that CAGW is an ersatz-solution to the demise of political ideology in the West. The End of History got somehow distracted with wardrobe choices in the 90s and never made it to the party.

      Meanwhile, reliable Marxists arrived as always and told us that End is not coming, ever, and the rumors of their death were greatly exaggerated.

      Between cocktails they also mentioned that free markets must go.

      They’ve been busy ever since making sure nothing stands in the way of history. CAGW is just the marketing name of the most recent world tour but the band is the same and the tunes are the familiar oldies.

      The totalitarian ideology is alive and well.

      The Guardian: Bring back ideology: Fukuyama’s ‘end of history’ 25 years on

      In Defence of Marxism: After COP21, an inconvenient truth: the problem is capitalism

    3. Colorado Wellington


      You are right that the spiritual void has to be filled and people will stuff something in there no matter what. The apocryphal Father Brown is alleged to have said that a man who won’t believe in God will believe in anything.

      I just don’t think that CAGW is an ersatz for political ideology. The End of History failed to materialize and Marxism is doing just fine:

      In Defence of Marxism: After COP21, an inconvenient truth: the problem is capitalism

      Just reading sod’s daily contributions makes it clear how easy it is to integrate the collectivist CAGW prescriptions into the old totalitarian belief system.

      1. Colorado Wellington

        [This is a shortened, reworked and partially redundant version of the previous comment which I thought got caught in the filter]

  2. Harry Dale Huffman

    If you want to get to the bottom of the larger problem, you have to take in a much larger picture, of the history and current ascendancy of false dogmas over good reason, that the world (and especially today’s consensus-minded scientists) refuse to even look at, for example:

    “Scientific Sainthood Today”


    “More Than Conspiracy, More Than Climate Science”

    In a nutshell, long-nurtured and false dogmas, both within and outside of science, are culminating now, in the political insanity that is pushing the utterly false, and essentially tyrannical, “global warming” scare.

  3. Green Sand

    Its Over!

    “Green transport target will be scrapped post-2020, EU confirms”

    “EU laws requiring member states to use “at least 10%” renewable energy in transport will be scrapped after 2020, the European Commission confirmed, hoping to set aside a protracted controversy surrounding the environmental damage caused by biofuels…..”


    The beginning of the end? Or just a momentary glimpse of logical thought?

    1. yonason

      With regard to Ethanol, I would agree. But I’m not sure that it would be wise to eliminate Biodiesel:

      And it seems that if you mix biodiesel with petroleum diesel, pollution can be reduced.

      Of course, using precious land resources to grow fuel rather than food is not only foolish, it is downright immoral.

      Here’s an overview of biodiesel.
      I don’t see why it couldn’t work, if implemented properly. It’s hard to imagine today’s greenies opposing something that’s actually harmful, though I suppose it could happen.

      1. rhee

        You say that “if you mix biodiesel with petroleum diesel, pollution can be reduced”, but how so? Is it not burning still a fuel source? Simply because the fat from McDonalds fry vat hasn’t fossilized doesn’t render it any less organic than fossil fuels which are allegedly organic. Thus burning either or both produce the same smokes.

        1. yonason

          Stunning deduction!

          Are all your family that clever?

          But you must tell me, Holmes, what tipped you off that you could ignore their actual data and replace it with your own brilliant reasoning.

          And I thought sod was “smart!”

  4. Buddy

    I see Gerrit van der Lingen called for the “Grand Minimum” to start…and for the earth to cool. That was in early 2014.

    Well…..2014 was a bust for him. Record high temps. Then 2015….higher record high temps. And 2016 isn’t starting out well for him either….already warmer than the first 3 months of 2015. And we have all this warm record setting weather DURING A TIME OF A SOLAR DOWNTURN IN ACTIVITY. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

    I guess he better start on a new book….and perhaps he might try using some science in his next effort…:)

    1. slk

      Heard of El Nino?

      1. AndyG55

        I don’t think Buddy is bright enough to figure out that an El Nino is an ocean cooling event.

        DUH !!!

    2. Broadlands

      Buddy… Find the temperatures in this article… at two decimal places:


      Then find the temperatures for 2014 and 2015 at NOAA.

      You will see that 1995 was warmer. You may have to do a little addition.

  5. Joe Bastardi

    Love it. The Title is spot on. The very design of the system with more land in the northern hemisphere, rotating the way it does around a pulsing sun, wobbling on its axis, invites conflict. Only in a Utopian fable is there no conflict and its because they believe they can rule men, and nature. A Fable indeed

  6. sod

    Each person that can read a graph will know that these claims are rubbish.

    We are changing an important part of our planet, the CO2 level:

    we are doing this, and it is measured acurately:


    what is happening has not happened in the last 10000 years. it is totally out of bounds:


    and even if we look back several 100000 years, this is still an anormal event:


    these are the facts, ideology has nothing to do with it!

    1. slk

      Forget the pretty graphs. Where is the data, the statistics used, etc? I can make a pretty graph that shows cooling using current data. That’s the beauty of statistics—you can prove most anything you want by choosing the data and the statistical method carefuly. Graphs are even better. Change the scale, change the message. Plot the change in global average temperature with the Y axis scaled from 0 to 58 and it looks like a flat line. I read that Michael Mann realized global warming was a crisis due to pretty, colored graphs. Not the data, but colored graphs. Some scientist, right?

    2. Ed Caryl

      You are quite correct, Sod, that CO2 has been measured very accurately. The problem is that temperature has not. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/19/systematic-error-in-climate-measurements-the-surface-air-temperature-record/

    3. AndyG55

      Yep, taking the CO2 level back at least some part way towards the greenhouse optimum of 800+ppm.

      And the world’s plant life is LUVIN’ IT.

      Finally, after so long……. a half decent food supply for the biosphere.

    4. DirkH

      “what is happening has not happened in the last 10000 years. it is totally out of bounds:


      That’s a beauty. You fall for anything, right? That’s the Shakun proxy with 300 year resolution, appended the instrumental record with DAILY resolution, i.e. a total artistic unscientific composition; appended by the Joe Romm linear extrapolation into la-la-land. After THAT addendum it’s as realistic as the magical unicorns in My Little Pony.

      Ready for consumption by the hard left vegans with their B12-starved dying brains.

      1. DirkH

        Why John Cook peddles it we know: He lives on Aussie taxpayer money by agitating and propagandizing for Climate Dictatorship. He is a global fascism shill; vulgo warmunist.

        1. Analitik

          And from John Englanders site

          John Englander is an oceanographer, consultant and sea level rise expert. He brings the diverse points of view of an industry scientist, entrepreneur and CEO. For over 30 years, he has been a leader in both the private sector and the nonprofit arena, serving as CEO for such noteworthy organizations as The Cousteau Society and The International SeaKeepers Society. As the Founder of the Rising Seas Group, he works with businesses, government, and communities to understand the financial risks of sea level rise. His bestselling book, High Tide On Main Street: Rising Sea Level and the Coming Coastal Crisis, clearly explains the science behind sea level rise, the impending devastating economic impacts and the “intelligent adaptation” that all businesses and coastal communities must consider today.

          Yep, we can rely on content from his site to be totally impartial and scientifically correct

      2. DirkH

        Shakun-Macotte, to be specific. Their “scientific work” was to take a sediment proxy, some remains of some shellfish IIRC, known to have 300 year resolution (I won’t explain what resolution means, sod; look up the Nyquist / Shannon theorem; I know you won’t because you’re not interested in truth or logic or science); and Shakun and Macotte themselves had the INSANE idea of appending the instrumental record WITHOUT undersampling it accordingly, creating a Frankenstein graph with *NO* scientific meaning; a pure *ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCT* ; not even an EDUTAINMENT product, except, it educates us about the methods of scientific fraudsters.

        Compared to Shakun and Macotte, even Gavin Schmidt deserves to be called a scientist!!!

        1. DirkH

          To Shakun and Macotte’s credit, they MIGHT be complete idiots. There is the theoretic possibility that somehow nobody noticed that they know nothing; and that they therefore are innocent morons mistaken for scientists, and NOT criminals.

          1. DirkH

            Sp let us ponder the possibility that Shakun and Macotte accidentally got mistaken for smart people; and that all controls have failed, meaning, those who should STOP idiots from publishing in scientific journals are by now idiots as well.

            We then arrive at the conclusion that the movie Idiocracy was a prescient prediction; that evolutionary entropy has gotten the better of civilisation, and that our problem is not rising sea level but the IQ of the people living in the “drowning” coastal cities which obviously become stupider faster than any sea level rise could put them out of their misery.

      3. DirkH

        Damnit. Sod fooled me. I misttok it for the Shakun/Macotte/Romm Hyper-Hockeystick. Only now do I read the legend. This is a cartoon that cartoonist John Cook did himself.

        Splicing Ice core proxy temperature calculations together with the Mauna Loa CO2 measurement.

        He could as well have spliced the US debt at the end. Sod, are you SO stupid that you think this has a meaning? This is EVEN WORSE THAN SHAKUN/MACOTTE/ROMM.

        You warmunists are a COMEDY TROUP.

        1. DirkH

          Ok I take that back. I misunderstood again. The graph is scientifically meaningful. It doesn’t talk about temperature. It shows only the CO2.

          sod posts it to illustrate that temperature has nothing to do with CO2. Otherwise we would have high temperatures now. We don’t. We are colder than all previous maxima in the last 10,000 years.

          Thanks, sod.

  7. roger

    That is very scary sod.
    Will there be lightning, and if so should I fit a conductor to my tin hat?
    Or are we past the tipping point where only self immolation will be the sensible thing to do?

  8. M E

    Garbage in gospel out very good! Also remember garbage in garbage out when talking of computer programs.

  9. AndyG55

    “they will most likely shake their heads in total disbelief.”

    A lot of sane people are already doing that.

    Cannot believe that so many apparently bright people have fallen for this CON!!

    1. yonason

      “Cannot believe that so many apparently bright people have fallen for this CON!!” – AndyG55

      Sadly, it has more to to with a lack of scruples than of brains. There are carriers and money to be made by running with the pack, as long as they don’t care who they trample under foot.

    2. yonason

      “careers,” not “carriers”

  10. Sam Pyeatte

    The “garbage in gospel out” formation is very good. The climate computer models are written to provide a desired output no matter what data is used for input.

  11. Denis Ables

    With regard to consideration of longer time periods before predicting climate – These warminista “scientists” all insist that the MWP was NOT a global phenomenon. That claim, all by itself gives them away. They have no basis for it. They ignore numerous peer-reviewed studies from around the globe showing the opposite, (not to mention the trend demonstrated by 6,000 boreholes) and, at the same time, demand that the skeptics provide evidence, which is ludicrous. It is the proponents of this CAGW bogus hypothesis which must show evidence for their claim.

    And, in the face of receding glaciers (Mendenhall in Alaska, and another in the Alps) which now expose splintered tree trunks still standing in their original upright position they have only one possible retort:
    “Are you gonna believe me or your own eyes?”

    This stuff has to be included in the next revision of “The Madness of Crowds…”

  12. Captain Illini

    A number of learned people have tried to point out the contradictions in climate alarmists – green meanies or something – and regardless of being given facts, studies, truth, there is push back and an endless volley of other studies, supposed (altered, made up)facts by the alarmists.

    Rather that do this type of debate, I have a question for the alarmist…Why don’t you want to believe in natural climate variation? Since we’ve already gone through three glaciations in the past 120,000 years…why don’t you believe another one will happen REGARDLESS of what men (global) do?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy