Prominent Veteran Meteorologist Pleads For Moderation In The Climate Debate, Slams Both Hardcore Alarmists, “Deniers”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

Averting a bloody climate science civil war

It’s time to take the debate away from the extreme factions and to move it to cooler heads, says veteran Swiss meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann

Former German Public television meteorologist Jörg Kachelmann wrote an essay commentary for the Swiss online Die Weltwoche here titled “Tell me where you stand”, where he compares today’s white-hot intolerance seen in climate science to the political intolerance witnessed in former communist East Germany.

“Religious furor”

In East Germany, either you adhered to the state’s hard communist doctrine, or you were the enemy. Such is the atmosphere we see today in climate science. Kachelmann writes: “Again today it’s either-or, and nothing in between.”

“Debates are important, and we must conduct them with arguments and without the religious furor that is being practiced today by both sides.”

The veteran meteorologist describes how on the climate issue “there are two irreconcilable camps”: the climate deniers and climate hysterics – each arrogantly claiming “infallibility”. It is no longer possible to be in between. Even those in between get insulted and attacked equally by both sides.

Natural science at schools have been “almost completely gutted”

While Kachelmann writes “deniers” are mostly older, right wing persons, the alarmists are made up of mostly “ugly young people” who are the products of school systems that have had their “natural science subjects almost completely gutted out”.

“These people don’t need graphs, but rather the godlike feeling of being on the correct side, which is why you don’t have to be so precise with facts,” Kachelmann comments.

“Today, the divining militancy of both sides is preventing a serious debate on priorities,” He says. “The green and brown nuts try to recruit for their political advantage those who have a big opinion on the subject, but no idea about it.”

Academic (green) supremacists

One example of the militant intolerance Kachelmann describes is illustrated by a recent Twitter comment by Potsdam scientist Stefan Rahmstorf, who reacted to German parliamentarian Philipp Lengsfeld, who earlier had tweeted on a “remarkable” statement recently published by 90 leading Italian scientists who challenged the alarmist climate science and claims of consensus.

Lengsfeld wrote:

Remarkable statement by scientists in Italy. For my taste a bit to hard, but so is the climate debate now: Heated.
From this I discovered a new site, by @NoTricksZone – a list of interesting studies. https://twitter.com/notrickszone/status/1146728105761038336?s=21 …”

 

That comment by Lengsfeld was obviously too much for Rahmstorf, who was obviously unnerved that a parliamentarian would make such an observation. He not only attacks Lengsfeld and this site here, but he also insults and slanders the 70 Italian scientists.

His Twitter comment in English:

It is particularly noteworthy when a member of parliament cannot distinguish a climate denier website from serious science and falls for a list of signatures by predominantly unprofessional and emeritus people – even more untrustworthy than the lung physicians.”

In Rahmstorf’s view, anyone who challenges the Potsdam alarmist climate position is an enemy of the climate state, and any scientist who questions the science is equivalent to a tobacco scientist.

Yes, its’ time to move the debate and science over to moderate voices.

Jörg Kachelmann is an entrepreneur and a 40-year veteran meteorologist operating the site: www.kachelmannwetter.com.

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

17 responses to “Prominent Veteran Meteorologist Pleads For Moderation In The Climate Debate, Slams Both Hardcore Alarmists, “Deniers””

  1. mwhite

    Thought you might chuckle

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-48931062

    Never seen a story concerning forests being flattened to make way for wind farms.

  2. bonbon

    The lead title refers to the result of Luther’s action then, 100+ years of war, only ended by the Treaty of Westphalia. This treaty was based on the brilliant idea of “the good of the other” . Meaning erstwhile arch-enemies would from then (1648) on all agree to work for the good of the other, and not seek action for past atrocities of which there were so many that half the population of Europe wiped itself out. This Treaty just happens to carved on the UN walls.

    Fast forward to today – where do we find this concept in action now?

    The China Belt and Road Initiative is based on Win-Win, not Zero-sum. Which is the exact same concept of the Treaty of Westphalia, this time on a global scale , from Confucius. The climate state strives to a zero-sum utopia with maybe 2 billion people, as previous PKI chief Schellnhuber promised, scratching a living.

    Kachelmann sentiment is admirable, but parochial. Switzerland to its great credit, has made clear moves in the BRI direction, EU orders nothwithstanding.

  3. Steve Borodin

    is there not something inconsistent to be calling for toleration and debate using the pejorative term ‘climate deniers’?

  4. Gilles

    Science is either wright or wrong. This is not democracy where you can meet in the middle.The skeptics are not the aggressors and intolerants.

  5. Robert Christopher

    ‘The veteran meteorologist describes how on the climate issue “there are two irreconcilable camps”: the climate deniers and climate hysterics – each arrogantly claiming “infallibility”.’

    Here, in Britain, there are many who long for some meaningful public discussion between those who have influence, if not some power, and sufficient knowledge and understanding of the Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry involved. Basic Economics and an appreciation of the difficulties running the businesses involved would also not go amiss. A presentation to educate the public, part of the BBCs charter, would be an appropriate response.

    But our state broadcaster, the BBC, will NOT allow any discussion of the matter: it’s agenda only allows Manmade Global Warming, also known as Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming, Climate Change or Extreme Weather, and its ability to link any weather disaster to Climate Change is renowned. Other broadcasters just follow suit.

    Our state infrastructure is also ‘full on’ message as they still follow our 2008 Climate Change Act, so we have an increasing number of windmills and solar panels across the country, funded by green taxes, that spend much of their time ‘doing nothing’ yet building a gas fired power station, which is much needed, has been beyond the capabilities of all concerned.

    Germany and Australia have well known problems and are hamstrung by national and international policies created when they ‘seemed like a good idea’ at the time.

    Our lame duck prime minister, Theresa May, is still committing the country to further CO2 emission reduction, with costs of over £1 TRILLION. She is renowned for not even consulting her cabinet, so it is not a surprise but it is still so depressing! 🙁

    We have also had Dieselgate, (mostly) German car manufacturers, pretending that their cars were able to meet ridiculous EU targets – and that was before diesel was going to ‘Save the World’, ignoring the increased Nitrogen oxide production, which was well known, even by schoolboys (of which I was one), in the 1960s.

    There are many reports of weather station data being ‘adjusted’ to fit UN policy, a policy that has been described by supporters as requiring Socialism, and all that entails!

    Countries are now spending over £3,000,000,000 on reducing CO2 in the atmosphere each day, and many qualified people say that the goal is a futile cause, yet they have been ignored for decades.

    Valentina Zharkova’s work is an exciting new area of study, and may explain all the variation in Earth’s temperatures over millennia. She has said that she wants those who have a better understanding of Meteorology to provide some input on her solar theories, but I haven’t seen anything publically.

    These points show that we have a very one sided affair, with sceptics valiantly making suggestions and posing academic challenges, without any response, apart from even more spending on Global Warming projects. No wonder there is ‘nothing in between’.

    So if Jörg Kachelmann wants the situation to change, he needs to advise the sceptics on how to break the impasse. 🙂

    Blaming both sides, especially using ‘denier’, a derogatory term for sceptics, isn’t going to help the situation, and only reflects badly on himself.

    1. Charles Pickles

      Bravo, well said. Our MPs are unable to recognise this state of affairs, unfortunately. Charles P

  6. Richard Saumarez

    Having followed Rahmstorf’s opinions for a number of years, he strikes me as having a tenuous grip on reality.

  7. sasquatch

    “The time to speak up has passed, now is the time for senseless bickering.”

    In the words of Marston Bates “there is nothing natural left in human behavior–it is all governed or modified in varying degree by culture, tradition, opinion.”

    Gluttons and Libertines is the title of the book by Marston Bates. Had a copy a long time ago now.

    Anybody who claims to be expert in food or sex is to be considered crackpot, from what I remember reading, but I guess it can happen anyplace.

    Deniers belong in that category according to the climate change alarmist gang green motley crew.

    Try not to be too judgmental, but, ya know, if the shoe fits.

    CO2 goes beserk, presto, climate change, bad weather, it is a war on weather and humans are at fault with their neverending burning of fossil fuels, every other kind of war has been fought, now it’s climate wars.

    Pays better than mechanized armies, those things are expensive, besides it is much better money that way, furtively exterminating populations via surreptitious means makes even more sense for the war-mongering green glob mob. As long as it pays. lol

    The New Green Deal is gluttonous unbridled greed, bunkum and bosh at a price higher than anyone can imagine. Munchausen syndrome by proxy for sure.

    It is definitely a summer of cooler than normal temps for summertime weather. One change I see in the temperatures, temperatures not reaching record temps at all. No 90 degrees Fahrenheit days yet to date, high eighties, but no more. The record on this date occurred in 1925 and the temp was at 103 Fahrenheit.

    So far, there has been 9.85 inches (25 cm) of rain since the first week of June. Piece of cake for another three or four inches, makes the crop.

    It is not that the climates don’t change, they do, it is the alarmists who want to claim it is an emergency and the politicizing of it all sticks in the craws of sensible people, makes them deniers to boot.

    When the lunatics form the asylum, they’re in charge.

    Doing the same thing over and over again and again and expecting different results is lunacy, somebody said it, whoever it was, had the right idea.

    Model after model is wrong, but, obviously, they’re doing it right, even if it is all wrong. I see sea ice at the sea ice extent website, the sea ice across the North Pole is still there up there. Is was supposed to be all gone a few years back. Wrong. Again.

    Can’t deny that they, those climate change alarmist warmunists, got it all wrong.

    Naturally. lol

  8. sasquatch

    “The time to speak up has passed, now is the time for senseless bickering.” – author unknown

    In the words of Marston Bates “there is nothing natural left in human behavior–it is all governed or modified in varying degree by culture, tradition, opinion.”

    The deniers are always wrong, undoubtedly use fossil fuels, therefore, they have don’t have a leg to stand on, they’re guilty and that’s that. The Greybar Hotel is where they need to be, permanently.

    The warmunists are always right, naturally, this is a climate emergency and it will be whether you like it or not.

    The beatings will continue until the morale improves.

    End of argument, no debate, nothing to see, move along.

  9. Gerald the Mole

    The academic qualifications of many of the “90” Italian names seem to me to be just a good as Rahmstorf’s qualifications.

  10. Yonason

    Another reason to not squabble about the science is because all the warmist hysteria is not now and never has been about the science, as UN scoundrels freely admit.
    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/noel-sheppard/2010/11/18/un-ipcc-official-admits-we-redistribute-worlds-wealth-climate

  11. tom0mason

    H.L. Mencken said it so well …

    The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

  12. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #367 | Watts Up With That?
  13. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #367 - Scienceexist
  14. Weekly Abstract of Local weather and Vitality # 367 – Next Gadget

    […] Prominent Veteran Meteorologist Pleads For Moderation In The Climate Debate, Slams Both Hardcore Ala… […]

  15. Weekly Local weather and Power Information Roundup #367 – Daily News
  16. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #367 – All My Daily News

Leave a Reply

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

Close