A few weeks ago the chairman of the UK government’s Committee on Climate Change, Lord Deben, held a meeting in a village hall on the banks of the Deben river. Having been following the arguments about climate change for years – I remember Anthony Watts setting up the survey of weather stations that found many of them were, because of siting problems, not fit for purpose – I thought it would be instructive to see how one of the most important issues of our time is being tackled by the UK’s ruling class of which Lord Deben is a prize specimen. The village hall was packed with friendly, cooperative people, nice to chat to, and I saw a few people I recognized even though I was forty miles from home.
Then the meeting began. I thought for a moment that I’d strayed into a revivalist happy-clappy rally by mistake. Those nice, cooperative people were transformed. Lord Deben, he who was John Gummer before being translated to higher things, was dressed rather like a trendy vicar, complete with plum-coloured trousers, and spoke of sin and redemption. The Reverend Gummer spoke about the original sin of burning fossil fuels and his congregation moaned agreement. He spoke of the anti-Christ that is known as CO2 and they applauded when he warned of its coming. They cried out the words ‘climate catastrophe’ and ‘climate crisis’ as he prophesied about rising sea levels and the melting of the polar ice caps.
I just don’t buy it.
The world is warming – the latest figures show that it has warmed about 0.4 deg C since 1979 when the satellites began to monitor temperatures, so that bit of the science is true (-ish, it’s warming at half the expected rate), but the computer models also predict anomalous warming in the troposphere, a warming caused by water vapour feedback. It’s not there. The tropospheric hotspot does not exist. Well, it doesn’t exist unless you work out the tropospheric temperatures using wind patterns rather than the thermometers which fly on weather balloons. Why should someone try to work out temperatures from weather patterns when they’ve got two perfectly good measured temperatures already? You may well ask! It’s politics. Or it may have crossed the line into religion. When a scientist advances increasingly unlikely explanations for the failure of his/her theory to match reality we are in the realms of belief, not science.
Let’s be perfectly clear about this. According to climate science, the global temperature is only going to increase at a dangerous rate if the CO2-induced warming triggers water vapour warming. Water vapour warming should induce a tropospheric hotspot. Balloons and satellites have looked for the hotspot. It is not there.
Without the water vapour feedback the computers show a warming rate that is half the accepted crisis/catastrophe value. So do the thermometers. I think I’d trust the thermometers more than politicised science.
In these circumstances it is foolish to set CO2 targets.
If there is no water vapour feedback there is no crisis, no catastrophe, not yet. But the world is warming and it might indeed become dangerous. How can our civilisation respond in a rational manner?
First, fund research into why the water vapour feed-back is not performing as the computer simulations predict. It could be – difficult to believe I know – that the simulations are wrong. If so there are warming/cooling factors that are not being considered. Find out what those factors are before costing the taxpayer trillions of pounds and closing down our civilisation. I’d suggest looking at ocean pollution by oil and plastic or nutrients such as nitrogen fertilisers, quantifying plankton population changes, dissolved silica run-off, black carbon albedo change on snowfields, but I’m sure readers can suggest others. It would seem sensible to address the real causes of warming, including CO2 of course, rather than betting the farm on a hypothesis which so far has failed to produce one single prediction that has worked out. Remember ‘twelve years to save the world’?
Second, do some pre-emptive development of the only technology which could support a CO2 neutral civilisation. The Greens won’t like it, what with their DNA being mainly derived from CND, but nuclear power can deliver. Not the stupid big reactors that are getting more expensive and further behind schedule every day: we need small modular reactors that can be factory build and shipped to site on barges or railway. Rolls Royce already has most of the technology, so it should be comparatively easy and a cheap insurance policy if the crisis is really a crisis. Get the SMR designs ready for production and then wait for the science to become clear.
Third, build a couple of prototype cloud ships as designed by Salter and Latham. If the design works these ships will increase the amount of cloud cover and reflect sunlight back into space. Not ideal as a solution but if it’s a crisis then you have to prepare to match the crisis with crisis measures. Build a couple and deploy them in the areas of the ocean where the introduction of salt aerosols will create low level cloud, increasing the albedo and bouncing the short wave radiation straight back to space. Satellite measurements can quantify the effect and allow us to fine-tune global temperatures if that is needed.
Fourth, demand a prediction from climate science, something unequivocal, something definite. An accurate prediction would greatly enhance their credibility. This is meant to be science. Whatever the Rev Gummer and his happy-clappies demand, faith is not enough.
No crisis, not yet. No catastrophe. If our politicians act like grown-ups there will be neither in our future. You remember grown-ups? It’s what politicians used to be, before they decided to listen to 16 year-olds for political and scientific advice.
There are two big lies in the Climate Change AKA Global Warming religion.
1. CO2 does not store energy nor reflect it back to source. At ground level it collides with other atmospheric molecules at a rate of 100 billion times a second, thereby sharing any energy it has intercepted with other molecules, mainly nitrogen and oxygen.
2. The effect of water vapour rising from mainly the tropical oceans is to extract energy in the form of latent heat to the upper atmosphere it takes about 30 minutes to do that journey. In the form of small water bubbles it envelopes molecules at a higher temperature (which is why it rises above cooler molecules). The water bubbles then move towards the poles carrying heat from the equator which otherwise would be as much as 90 deg C to the poles which would otherwise be -90 deg C. The molecules also radiate heat to space thereby re-radiating the surplus energy and maintaining the globe at a near constant temperature for a given amount of energy received from the Sun.
The effect of water vapour is NEGATIVE, not positive. If it was positive the globe would have suffered runaway warming billions of years ago. The Earth is relatively starved of CO2 at the moment, this being only the second time in its 4.5 billion year existence that it has been well below 1000ppm. That would be the optimum level to stimulate maximum plant growth, which would be desirable to feed the people and green the planet.
The real pollutants are Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrous Oxide(s), and plastic. All the rest is about controlling the Worlds energy supply and thereby controlling all human activity.
The good news is that the real science is winning. The religious dogma, the media and the educational institutes are almost unstoppable, but eventually people will realise that the effect human activity has on climate is negligible. The climate has always changed and will continue to do so. As we are currently in a warm blip on the way to the next ice age there is a well supported view that our production of CO2 will be helpful and avoid the very real disaster of a dip below 150 ppm, when plant life stops growing. we’ve been near to it before. CO2 is actually a terrible greenhouse gas because of its molecular structure, it simply doesn’t work very well for that. However it is very beneficial for plant life, something we desperately need to feed an increasing global population. All of this is factual, the real science. ‘Inconvenient Facts’ by Gregory Whitestone is essential reading for anyone interested in the truth.
In science it is impossible to make an exact measurement. Without anyone quoting the experimental error in the 0.4 centigrade rise it is meaningless. In the cretaceous period the CO2 level was approximately five times higher than present levels and the earth carried on fine, CO2 is required for photosynthesis. Spending a trillion pounds to reduce the worlds supply of plant food is not a sensible idea.
Permit me to repeat what I said on 19 April:
”
‘Only if all the inhabitants of the planet realize that they are facing immediate and common dangers, can a universal political will be generated for united action to secure the survival of humanity. This is why we call for the creation of world solidarity.’ –page 4;
‘The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. Some states have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by blaming external enemies. The ploy of finding a scapegoat is as old as mankind itself–when things become too difficult at home, divert attention to adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for the purpose.’ –page 70;
‘In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.’–page 75;
‘…By far the most urgent of these is global warming which threatens the world’s economic and social system.’ –page 95
— from “The First Global Revolution: A Report By The Council Of The Club Of Rome” (Alexander King, Bertrand Schneider) 1991.
OLBN-0-00116-032-X
”
Namely, PRETEXT.
Increasingly one feels unable to trust the Government, its policy or its media. “Climate Change”, 5G safety (oxymoron?), GcMAF prohibition, and not least its corrupt monetary system. Which may explain:
https://dcms.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5nm7sPoxilSoTg9
[HMG] Online Harms White Paper Consultation [closes 1 July 2019]
“This is an open public consultation. We particularly encourage responses from organisations, companies and others with relevant views, insights or evidence.”
So the citizen – the consumer of media – is an afterthought…?
Thank you.
Hallelujah! A timely article in view of the latest from our incompetent PM who has just announced that a legally binding target of zero emissions by 2050 is to be set. She has failed to ruin this country with the ridiculous WA, which all those saps in the Conservative leadership race voted for, and now she threatens to ruin us with nonsensical targets. Even that buffoon (sorry I try not to be vindictive but..) Philip Hammond has said that the estimated £1Trillion cost of such a policy would impact on Education, Health and Policing. Well that was very perceptive of him. £1Trillion is of course is in excess of £60 Billion per year for the next 30 years. That puts the cost of the EU in the shade.
That policy will mean an end to gas boilers in households and the complete switch to electric cars, a subject that has already been discussed on this site. We are told that any short fall can be offset by planting trees yet the planting of trees has fallen over the last three decades.
https://www.savills.co.uk/research_articles/229130/279851-0/have-we-got-enough-trees-to-reach-our-targets-
Then there is 5G and the removal of trees. Yes there are reports denying this but the evidence is there from our Government and communication companies (see Verizon and Telstra).
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/25/for-the-chop-the-battle-to-save-sheffields-trees
Of course it is to produce a ‘greener world’ despite CO2 greening the world. May tells us we should be proud. Well that is about as meaningful as telling us the WA was Brexit.
Will we ever get any sanity in the madhouse that is our Parliament?
Maybe some badges with ‘Thank God For CO2’ on them. That would be interesting, and a start, but would probably get lynched, such is the hysteria.
That should have ‘been in excess of £30Billion per year for the next 30 years’ not £60Billion.
Also I had not read Gary Conways excellent article posted same day which deals with May’s madness.
There was once an ice age in Britain for many centuries – eventually the glaciers all melted. Wonder why?
The climate has always changed and the cunning politicos like Deben are promoting fear of this to make money.
And when Dickens was a lad the Thames froze over (yes, I know it is narrower and faster now) ☃️
My son is doing a PhD in tomography and is heavily involved with research and the met office who are financing new research into weather and climate which is wholly science based. I struggle to understand but will certainly get some interesting facts as opposed to the usual fairy stories when they materialise especially if they try and suppress the evidence.
Lord Deben aka John Selwyn Gummer was the last time I looked the chairman of Veolia the company that is better known for dealing with waste but is also involved in cabling off shore wind turbines. Perhaps his Lordship should first disclose his interests before trying to convince a sceptical public with his powers of undoubted deception and persuasion.
In years gone by I had many a discussion with John Gummer over our possible membership of the then EEC ( Common Market ) He was always such a Europhile and I was just the reverse.
Of course as a young conservative he had just won the national speaking competition and didn’t allow anyone to forget it.
People can believe in many things and IMO they are entitled to do so. My objections starts when they starting to create promised land using my money and enforce their believes on me. Kosher, halal, vegan, CO2-lees diets. Sinful and blessed behaviour and absolute truth. Apocalypse is near. Should we admit we are living in modern theocracy and how to separate the Church from the state, again?
Julian I 100% agree with you that Lord Deben and his followers evince all the characteristics of a cult, a dangerous one at that, given that they’re politically active and can affect public policy.
I also agree with you about the hot spot which you’ve explained very well in clear understandable terms. It has, Incidentally been theoretically and independently confirmed mathematically using feedback analysis by Lord Monkton.
With regards to the ‘Maybe’ I would like to suggest that there is no problem with rising global temperatures, per se. Although the Earth’s average temperature may still be rising there is plenty of evidence to suggest that this increase is decelerating and given the temperature decreases in high latitudes that have already occurred, seems likely to begin falling.
So I think there is currently no need to have climate cultists in salt ships sustainably sailing the oceans increasing cloud cover or any other such endeavour to intentionally change the Earth’s climate. I’ve seen some proposals to alter the climate which might actually work and in my view, have the potential to be dangerous.
The Earth’s average temperature has indeed been increasing for about 20 or so years due to a number of consecutive, very strong solar cycles. However the current solar sunspot cycle we’re in is very much weaker and is now at a minimum. This is beginning to be reflected in the weather with record low temperatures in the US and Canada and also Northeast Europe and Asia and a record cool wet summer (so far) in the US.
This trend to lower temperatures, increased ice cover and snowfall with its effect on food production at high/low latitudes will continue until after the Sun becomes more active again.
We have the records showing this is a repeating pattern going back to the Maunder Minimum.
Michael, we’re talking politics here. We need to persuade people that their fears are being addressed. My personal belief is that the warming has causes other than CO2 — natural and anthropogenic — but there is a large minority of the untutored who believe the politicised science. They will (probably) accept the ‘let’s be cautious and prepare, but not sell the farm’ narrative, and if not they are the hard-left control freaks who seek to exploit the meme for their own purposes.
Politics is about persuasion. See Ms May and her attempts to lie us into the EU trap. She hasn’t been able to do it by telling you the truth about the Tory treachery – we don’t want to obey the referendum instruction so sod off you proles – but she’s come close by creeping up to the betrayal with her surrender document.
Salter and Latham’s ships are an engineer’s solution — turn them off and the aerosols stop being produced, and you’re back to the status quo in a few days. The nonsense about using sulphur dioxide/aluminium particles in the stratosphere is barking
My bet is that a lot of the warming is due to oil pollution of the ocean surface. it lowers albedo, smooths waves, reduces aerosol production, and suppresses plankton feeding so there’s less dimethyl sulphide. Less DMS, fewer salt aerosols, less low cloud, warming.
It’s late, after the folkie night and a couple of glasses of a nice peaty Norfolk whisky. Enough!
JF
.
A splendid article. The world has an environment problem. Envionment means everything. We can see many of the facts before our eyes. We continue to make it worse.. Proper steps one at a time. I keep saying, A Textbook.? Step One.Divide into recognisable elements eg Water,Air, Ectectro magnetic,Earth, Human, resources etc This is not a religion or political Step 2 Identify roots. just like Euclid go back to defining a point and a line..Or if you must Atoms and thingummies Step 3 Arguments. Emotive. To be cleared away. Fairness, ambition humanity,. We must never have another bible or koran.Human ingenuity must be encouraged. Commercialism consumerism and other aberrations/incentives to be addressed in this step.
You can see why the Aristocracy like it ..Only they can deal with it on a world wide basis.. Also politicians vicars,generals, me, journalists etc.
Start by shortening it clearing away non proofs.in ‘ teachers notes’.
OK then Julian. Get on with it. Ready by nexr tuesday? And I’ll try to sort out capital letters.