Normally the UN General Assembly is no place for hysterical activists to blow off their anger, aggression, threats and doomsday fantasies.
In a letter to Secretary General Guterres, 500 scientists are now requesting that the UN end the hysteria and return to rational dialogue.
===============================================================
There is no climate crisis
An open letter to the UN Secretary General
António Guterres, Secretary-General. Photo: UN.
More than 500 prominent scientists from all over the world, among them distinguished MIT climate scientist Prof. Richard Lindzen, are urging the Secretary-General of the United Nations for a further, de-politicised discussion of the climate issue, in which alternative scientific views are also given a voice.
A UN climate meeting will be held in New York on 23 September. To this end, CLINTEL has sent two registered letters, one to the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, and one to the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, Patricia Espinosa Cantellano, together with the text of the European Climate Declaration (see below).
This also includes the explicit request to organise a joint meeting with world-class scientists. The letter follows:
Your Excellencies,
There is no climate emergency
A global network of more than 500 knowledgeable and experienced scientists and professionals in climate and related fields have the honor to address to Your Excellencies the attached European Climate Declaration, for which the signatories to this letter are the national ambassadors.
The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models. Current climate policies pointlessly, grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, continuous electrical power.
We urge you to follow a climate policy based on sound science, realistic economics and genuine concern for those harmed by costly but unnecessary attempts at mitigation.
We ask you to place the Declaration on the agenda of your imminent New York session.
We also invite you to organize with us a constructive high-level meeting between world-class scientists on both sides of the climate debate early in 2020. The meeting will give effect to the sound and ancient principle no less of sound science than of natural justice that both sides should be fully and fairly heard. Audiatur et altera pars!
Please let us know your thoughts about such a joint meeting.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate polities should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming. Only very few peer-reviewed papers even go so far as to say that recent warming is chiefly anthropogenic.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crop worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and bats, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.
Policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.
Our advice to political leaders is that science should strive for a significantly better understanding of the climate system, while politics should focus on minimizing potential climate damage by prioritizing adaptation strategies based on proven and affordable technologies.
The undersigned ECD Ambassadors
Professor Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands
Professor Reynald Du Berger French, Canada
Terry Dunleavy, New Zealand
Viv Forbes, Australia
Professor Jeffrey Foss English, Canada
Morten Jødal, Norway
Rob Lemeire, Belgium
Professor Richard Lindzen, USA
Professor Ingemar Nordin, Sweden
Jim O’Brien, Republic of Ireland
Professor Alberto Prestininzi, Italy
Associate Professor Benoît Rittaud, France
Professor Fritz Vahrenholt, Germany
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, United Kingdom
I watched Their Excellencies listening intently to Greta Thunberg. Maybe the Asperger syndrome is much more common than previously thought?
I fear Aspergers is contagious. The Children’s Crusade demonstration front lines seem now to be mostly girls…resembling Greta
The tragedy is that the Excellencies will summarily ignore this outstanding and objective presentation of facts.
Sad.
Of course they’ll ignore it. Their AI-like brains aren’t capable of grasping anything that makes sense. They are allergic to facts.
Their “excellencies” (hard to keep a straight face writing that) have been harping for decades on what Ms. “Toonberg” is saying, and no one’s been listening. They aren’t going to change their message, so since it isn’t working, they have to figure out a new way to present it.
I can see them huddled in a brain storming session, and someone suggests…
“I know, lets get some kid to come in and parrot our talking points, while we pretend we’re hearing this stuff for the first time. Then we’ll be like ‘Oh, wow We better DO something.”
Someone else responds…
“It’s a long shot, but we’re desperate. Go for it.”
“excellencies” – hahahahahahaha
Just a bunch of con artists.
Bingo, perfect analysis of the way the Socialicommimarxifascists go about propagandizing & indoctrinating.
Thanks, cf4t
JoNova calls it that way, too.
“The only reason Climate Scare Machine played the Child card was because they’ve given up the adult contest of persuasion.”
http://joannenova.com.au/2019/09/eco-worriers-new-strategy-use-greta-as-a-human-shield-against-debate/
And here you have it. The World famous authority on science-you-can’t-learn-in-school has spoken.
https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/09/IMG_0415.jpg
When they use a young girl to push the agenda and hide behind her rather than debate you know the jig is up.
I suspect it will go straight in the bin, without even being read.
“Their “excellencies” (hard to keep a straight face writing that)”
Imagine the anger I feel every time I watch a UK MP stand up in the House of Commons, and addresses a fellow MP as “My Right Honourable Friend”…
That’s gotta be painful. My deepest sympathies.
When I see the spaghetti computer models, more than 100 different results, I wonder why they all disagree? I mean if they agree 97% how can they all disagree with computer models? Maybe they 97% agree that they don’t know the future climate will be? But there is on that is close to reality, the Russian?
LOL – Funny. Good one.
You are being taken for a ride – by vested interests – not global experts!
Professor Guus Berkhout – The Netherlands
In 1964 Berkhout started working for Royal Dutch Shell. In 1976 he returned to Delft University of Technology, and became a professor of acoustic imaging and sound control. In 1987 he also became professor of geophysics. During his time at Delft University Berkhout was the founder and scientific director of the Delphi Consortium, which does seismic research for a consortium of oil and gas companies.
Berkhout founded the Netherlands-based climate change denial organization Climate Intelligence Foundation (CLINTEL). Mid 2019 plans of CLINTEL and Berkhout were leaked showing that they were organizing a campaign against political commitments to net zero carbon emissions being made to law. According to The Independent these campaign feature “hundreds of climate change deniers including academics, politicians and lobbyists”. Signatories come from several denial organizations such as Koch-founded Cato Institute and Heartland Institute, which are also part of the Atlas Network, Institute of Economic Affairs, Adam Smith Institute and TaxPayers’ Alliance as well as members from oil- and gas companies. The letter, which was confirmed by Berkhout, claims that current changes in the climate are “expected from the cyclic behaviour of the climate system” and that there is “no proof” that carbon dioxide is a major driver of global warming. According to Desmog the “international organising group” behind the campaign “includes some well-known figures from the climate misinformation world” such as Richard Lindzen, Vic Forbes, Fritz Vahrenholt, Jeffrey Foss, Jim O’Brien and Terence Dunleavy.
Thanks for mentioning CLINTEL https://clintel.nl.
Its hard to find information and fellow organisations that propose other views on “climate change”.
I will be ever so greatful for your help.
I would not go into too much details about the scientist and people you mentioned in your post. Some of them have already a good name and no need more advertisement. But if it is all the same for you, thank you very much!
Sorry shifferbrains, you’re the socialicommimarxifascist lemming being taken for a ride. You point out several ‘interested’ parties when it concerns actual scientific research (what you call ‘deniers’) when the real deniers here are the Socialicommimarxifascists who ignore the double standard of their fearless leaders FLYING all over the world is fossil fuel burning jets or boating to the next symposium in their multimillion dollar fossil fuel burning yachts telling the rest of the world what they can eat, drink, smoke or drive while they dine on meat, caviar & the finest wines. Why is it that you’ve ignored the ‘21st century oil baron’ wannabes making hundreds of millions of dollars enriching themselves off the greatest hoax ever perpetuated by man (aka global warming/climate change) while keeping the masses stagnating? Why is it you tolerate the killing of millions of birds who are being diced by wind farms or incinerated by solar farms? These harmful devices are destroying life on a massive scale yet you socialicommimarxifascist lemmings try to bury it or ignore it in order to get your way.
You use the Koch name constantly to attack real scientists because you don’t like the message while totally ignoring the FACT that Koch bros. have donated (unfortunately) to many left-leaning causes.
So, I say to you ignorant lemming, why the double standard? Why do you ignore real science? Why have you tolerated the alteration of data such as with the climate record as admitted to by NOAA & NASA? Would any real scientist still be working in any scientific field if they altered their data?
CAGW receives far more pecuniary and political support, especially from governments, than all the “denial organizations” could hope to afford their purported clientèle.
In Germany, for instance, the government is openly partisan in favour of CAGW and, consistent with that, condones and effects the political suppression of non compliant science.
State-sponsored alarmism is so overwhelming that the most powerful German companies leave the country or give in to irrational business propositions (battery-based e-mobility) mandated by the state.
Equally important, those trite accusations concerning “denial organizations” ignore the important fact that (1) everyone has the right to do research or to support the research of other parties and that (2) it is the quality and content of research that matters, not the identity (or supposed political leanings and associations) of the researchers or their supporters.
Nothing demonstrates more glaringly the religio-political nature of alarmism than its preoccupation with identity rather than content.
Nothing demonstrates more glaringly the anti-scientific nature of alarmism than its preoccupation with “denial”, when science is the incessant process of trying to refute (“deny”) the truth of theories.
Nothing demonstrates more glaringly the unscientific nature of alarmism than its assertion that thanks to a young and rudimentary field of evolving knowledge (with little or no understanding of many of the important factors influencing climate) “the science is settled”.
Well said!
Scientists get paid! This is astounding to me!
So by your attitude I infer that the only scientists with opinions worth listening to are unemployed and living in their parents basements.
Either the source of a scientists funding biases him/her or it doesn’t.
But it is undeniable that the source of funding and political power of a politician will certainly bias them. And largely if not completely politicians are as ignorant if not more so of science and the process. A process which is becoming more polluted by politics as time passes.
Regardless of a so called conflict of interest, bias or hidden agenda, a rational debate from all sides makes sense. Why on earth not…Scare tactics and using children is exploitative and despicable.
If it weren’t for the petroleum industry, we would not have much of the coring data that has opened our eyes to past climate change including warming and cooling cycles. It is a fact that the AGW models are no better than a bone throwing shaman in determining future climate trends. The bubble headed AGW proponents are political lapdogs full of hot air.
“It is a fact that the AGW models are no better than a bone throwing shaman…”
Magic 8-ball also.
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/secret-tool-of-climate-prediction-revealed-t11570.html
The alarmists have been trying to Lynch CO2 from the beginning with nothing short of a public mob spurred on by a sympathetic media and the money hungry socialists that have been whipping up the frenzy with a call for speed. That is exactly how a Lynch Mob works, convict with only half the evidence, refuse cross examination and eliminate the defence. Shout out the guilt and rush the hanging before the real evidence comes out and proves it’s innocence. The IPCC is nothing short of the leader of a Lynch Mob using Lynch Mob tactics to further their ends.
[…] Tidligere Greenpeace-leder Patrick Moore. I kort intervju gir han her en kortfattet oversikt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE , I et lengre foredrag i London i 2015, for The Global Warming Policy Foundation, gir han en utfyllende forklaring på hvorfor CO2 er et gode, og ikke et onde, for Jorda: https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2016/10/Moore-2.pdf I forbindelse med FNs klimamøte i New York i september 2019 sendte 500 vitenskapspersoner nylig et åpent brev til FNs generalsekretær, der det påpekes at det ikke eksisterer noen klimakrise: https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] Climate Depot reports: […]
[…] Link: https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] Link: https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]
autistic children are vulnerable to these messages or doom and disaster, they are being subject to abuse by the leftest politics in their homes.
Aspergers is “nerdism”. It’s incredibly common….possibly from bringing highly damaged babies back from the dead, after a messy and severely traumatic birthing process.
[…] Link: https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/24/no-climate-emergency-mit-climate-expert-500-prominent-global-sci… […]