Climate meanderings

Populism and cultism in climate discussions

The world's climate religion

Scientists seldom agree on any specific thing, unless it can be proved experimentally or in some areas by calculation but most would agree with the statement, 'the world's climate has changed periodically and irregularly over its life to date'. However, when we get to the last hundred years or so, suddenly every one has an opinion and climate is now in the hands of the two religious bodies, namely, the 'Warmists' and the 'Deniers'. 

'Warmists', covers those scientists and non scientists that believe    the apparent temperature change since the 1900's is due to human intervention, whilst those termed 'Deniers' disagree.

BOTH GROUPS ARE GRIPPED BY A RELIGIOUS FERVOUR

Since Al Gore bombasted the the media with his notorious 'hockey stick graph' and created carbon trading; carbon dioxide suddenly became the villain, (since this is not a scientific rebut and I am not a scientist, I won't dwell on the technicalities).

Carbon dioxide is now blamed for being a 'greenhouse gas' that is blocking heat from escaping the earth's atmosphere and causing average temperatures to rise but records show that the temperature rises before the trace quantities of CO2 increase; clever eh? Sounds like some quantum activity to me. Religion is a wonderful thing!

Some 'Deniers' even claim that there is no temperature change and bring forward much technical hornswoggle to support this but most believe that Gaia has her own cycles and wobbles and that changes to CO2 measured to date are nature driven.

Now enter the prophets of doom: the media has provided some ordinary folk with fora to espouse their passionately held views. We have a veritable icon of the BBC, David Attenborough making extravagant statements on behalf of the government controlled media giant to support the 'Warmists' and the green agenda foisted on us by a sycophantic EU loving government, to our detriment and at our expense. We also have a young Swedish girl, Greta Thunberg being opportunistically manipulated by the international media to regurgitate what she has been told or read to further brain wash the public with evangelical determination, (at 16 years old it has to be)

I feel sure that there are some 'Warmist' scientists who are both sincere and correct in their statements on temperature increase trends being experienced and recorded. But the veracity or not and to what degree these claims are published should stand on the back of incontrovertible science backed by repeatable empirical finding or repeatable mathematical modelling. Instead we find conspiracy to slant findings towards the establishment mandate and a Frankfurt School like repetition of the mantra that all is settled science, when by virtue of the number of dissenting scientists it clearly isn't.

As long as we are currently lashed with propaganda one way or the other the people of this planet will never know the truth and will have to pay the price of constant greening and carbon greed.

Starting from when the UN supported IPCC produced a chart showing a temperature rise suddenly starting during the industrial revolution and reaching levels experienced in the Medieval Warm Period but then publishing the 'hockey stick' graph without showing the MWP and now using non scientists to obfuscate the actual known facts is a conspiracy, a green conspiracy.

What is needed is a concerted published media supported study that covers unknown issues that cause dissent, e.g. CO2 is a known gas that supports plant growth and indeed is used by some food growers to increase vegetation growth and is an insulating gas or greenhouse gas. To what degree has not been scientifically accepted by all and in models used to support IPCC findings an even greater insulator, water vapour, has been ignored, obviously slanting the results. 

Much of the raw data to support the IPCC had been processed by the University of East Anglia who refuse to share the raw data so others can replicate, (or otherwise) their findings. These data should be in the public domain after all we paid for the collection.

  

There are other issues that need to be carefully considered and explained to a bemused public; Solar radiation affects and sun spot data need to be taken into account in determining what is going on with our climate and to exclude them is bound to add to the 'conspiracy' element. Also the Nile Climate Engine has yet to be explained away: possibly the most damming to the CO2 theory. This suggests that when the Aswan Dam was built circa 1902 the Nile below it reduced in size as did its various flood plains and the delta; thus reducing the evaporation area/rate and putting less moisture into the prevailing winds that eventually enter the Atlantic ocean off of West Africa, resulting in less cloud cover and therefore greater local heating of the ocean in that location. The interesting point here is that when calculations to determine the amount of heat required to raise the earths temperature by 1.2 degrees centigrade, (the measured increase since 1902) are done they equate to the amount of heat added due to the Nile Engine Effect leaving no room for the supposed CO2 induced increase.

The link below takes you to a prospectus of the work done by Conor McMenomie the scientist who developed this theory.

 Nile Climate Engine

Interestingly Conor hosted a meeting on the 19th March, of representatives of  from Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan, and Eritrea, and other interested parties at the European Parliament to determine the next step needed to re-engineer areas of the Nile so that original evaporation rates could be re-established; a massive task but one that could benefit many millions of people.

There are many other issues surrounding supposed anthropogenic climate change that need openly addressing; for example, the scientific case for why CO2 increase lags temperature increase still has to be agreed.

To be continued