Climate Tricks 67, Alarmists with deep-seated intolerance

Last May 22, a friend Joe Real, posted this in his fb wall, praising the automakers and attacking Trump about climate change.

Carmakers to Trump: 'Climate change is real'

BY MORGAN GSTALTER - 05/22/18 08:27 AM EDT

http://thehill.com/regulation/energy-environment/388736-carmakers-in-letter-to-trump-climate-change-is-real

Joe is the older brother of my classmate in high school in Cadiz City, Negros Occidental. He is among the bright boys our city has produced because he went to Philippine Science High School, then UPLB, Agri Engineering. He has lived in California for many years now.

We have debated a few times in the past over climate and energy issues, he taking the alarmist side while I take the realist/skeptic side. One time he deleted my comments, also the comments of his other friend who disagreed with him on his "more renewables to save the planet" argument. It was some sort of an alarm bell for me but I let it pass. So I commented in his post, 

At first I did not read his entire response so I followed up with these questions:

Joe, Pls show (1) of the recent CC say the past 200 years, how much is nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

(2) Medieval warm period, how much was nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

(3) Roman warm period, how much was nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

No numbers means crystal ball hula-hula, hahaha.

Then I re-read his comments and realized that it was full of unsubstantiated claims and personal attacks, of deep-seated intolerance at being questioned of his belief. 

See these for instance and my comments in his thread:

(1) "climatic changes which is very rapid compared to any other geological times" -- where are the proof of this? rapid by how much, 2x, 50x, 100x? Proof and links? say compared with the Medieval warm periodA? Roman warm period?

(2) "you are being part of the problem because you loved fossil fuels as your livelihood." -- Where is your proof, Joe? I wish that was true so I will be rich now. You are guided by emotionalism and voodoo science to make fake and stoopid claims,

(3) "I am writing this in hope that your future children or your future relatives will vilify what you’re doing." -- my children enjoy riding an airplane that uses fossil fuels. If I make them ride giant kites or giant brooms to fly to Negros or Iloilo, they will vilify and hate me.

Now look at yourself and your lifestyle -- you post your travels to far away places, meaning you did not ride giant kites but giant airplanes that use fossil fuels, then you hate fossil fuels. That's 101% hypocrisy double talk, Joe.

(4) "you don’t have any credentials to show, so you only have an opinion that’s worth nothing much except create some noise." -- horrible, if one cannot confront the issues and counter-arguments, just do endless personal attacks.

Again, answer this, you who have "credentials":

(1) of the recent CC say the past 200 years, how much is nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

(2) Medieval warm period, how much was nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

(3) Roman warm period, how much was nature-made vs man-made? Proof?

I did not realize that his intolerance at being questioned is so deep, so wild. He will make fictitious claims like "fossil fuels as your livelihood", I think only highly emotional and intolerant minds would make up stories like that.

I like fossil fuels not because I earn money from those companies. Never worked for any of them in the past and the present, not even part time or consulting work. I like fossil fuels because they gave humanity modern and more convenient lives. I drive a car that uses gasoline; I ride airplanes that use aviation turbo; we cook in the house on LPG, not on firewood or charcoal/biomass; we have 24/7 electricity and internet mainly because of coal, natural gas and oil-based peaking plants, all fossil fuels. Without fossil fuels, life will be horribly dark, inconvenient and backward.

Joe's intolerance and emotionalism like Al Gore-UN-CCC-WWF-others are based on voodoo science.

Joe's other friend, Paul Sarmiento, also made some good observations:

Joe Real To prove that the current change in climate is mainly due to man, you have to clear all doubts that natural climate variability is smaller than human caused forcing. Unfortunately, as I have been arguing across different fora, the records we have is too short and too sparse to draw any conclusions from.

But of course you would ignore that since you've been an AGW believer from the get go. Open your mind and use critical thinking. Use your statistical skills and not rely on conclusions from other scientists. Their own data will belie what they conclude.

Also the argument that the current warming is faster than at any time in history is a phenomena related to the way granularity of data decreases as you average it out over greater time periods.

A good example is the daily swings in temperature is much greater than monthly swings in temperature. And monthly swings in temperature is much greater than annual swings in temperature. This is true in years vs decades, decades vs centuries and so forth. Since current era records are measured in months and years which is being compared to proxy temperature records that are averages over larger periods of time, the fallacy crops up that the current warming is faster than at any time in history.

But a quick way to falsify this notion is to look at the first half of the 20th century vs the 2nd half. Both periods shows a sharp increase in global temperature. From 1900 to 1940 the slope of the temperature rise is almost the same as for the period of 1970 to 2000.

But while AGW theory blames the 1970 - 2000 rise to humans, they cannot attribute the same to the rate of increase in the early 20th century. Therefore, to blame nature for the first and to blame humans for the second is incongruent to the way science works.

--------------

See also:
Climate Tricks 64, Bitter cold and snow are caused by AGW, January 06, 2018 
Climate Tricks 65, "Last chance" to save the planet stories, 1992-2018, March 16, 2018 
Climate Tricks 66, Ignoring the implications of worsening cosmic rays situation, March 18, 2018

Earth Hour 9, Hate-love of fossil fuels

Another #EarthHour today, an annual global campaign by the WWF. Darkness is either good or bad. If good, then people should do it nightly or many hours a night like North Korea, not just 1 hour/year. And #fossilfuel is either good or bad. If bad, then people should stay off-grid because the grid transmits and distributes 50% of all PH electricity coming from coal power, another 20% coming from oil and natural gas, both fossil fuels. One cannot say "Fossil fuel is bad but I'll keep using it anyway". That hypocrisy and double talk is like saying that "Corruption and stealing is bad but I'll keep doing it anyway." #CCC, #WWF, #AlGore, #UN, #DENR, #Greenpeace.

See also WWF double talk here. It wants a "zero-carbon world", fine.  People, companies, foundations, governments, UN agencies, should donate/send more money to the WWF to help attain this goal.

Then WWF officials and people are into frequent global climate talks/meetings. Fine, they should be riding solar planes, giant kites, uber-brooms or uber-witches, to move across countries and continents. They hate CO2-emitting oil used by commercial planes, buses and cars; they hate CO2-emitting coal, oil and gas power plants.

And WWF, GPeace, many other environmental activist groups are also campaigners of "climate justice" movement. They demand "system change" -- referring to change from capitalist system to socialist or communist system. Cool.

The main purpose of Earth Hour campaign is to sustain climate alarmism, to keep scaring, fooling and milking the people of "man-made" warming/climate change so we need "man-made" solutions via more government, more UN, more carbon/coal/oil taxes, more climate loans (World Bank, ADB Philippines), more climate bureaucracies, more/frequent global climate junkets.

For them, there is little or no such thing as "nature-made" warming/CC. They deny that CC is natural; deny that CC is cyclical; deny that global cooling can happen after global warming; deny that the Sun, galactic cosmic rays, clouds and water vapor, ocean oscillation, other natural factors are big drivers of climate; deny that CO2 is a useful and non-pollutant gas. They are the big deniers then turn their fingers around so that large-scale climate robbery and trillions of $ scam will continue.

--------------

See also: 
Earth Hour 6: The WWF can Change Climate Change?, March 29, 2015 
Earth Hour 7, Lesson in basic electrical engineering, March 21, 2016 
Earth Hour 8, Celebrate darkness vs modernization, March 23, 2017

Climate Tricks 65, "Last chance" to save the planet stories, 1992-2018

The "planet saviors", their leaders, they are a bunch of jokers and story tellers. See the timeline of their "last chance" warnings to save the planet unless we send them trillions and trillions of dollars.  There were many similar stories in between these years, I just show random stories from 1992 to 2018. Enjoy.

(1) "FEATURE: Last chance to save the planet?"

New Scientist, By Fred Pearce,  30 May 1992,

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13418235-100-last-chance-to-save-the-planet/

(2) "A Global Warming Treaty's Last Chance"

TIME, By Katherine Bonamici Monday, July 16, 2001,

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,167699,00.html

(3) "Climate talks 'last chance' to avoid catastrophe"

2 Dec, 2007, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10479692

(4) "Cancun climate change talks: 'last chance’ in the snakepit"

By Geoffrey Lean 6:32AM GMT 29 Nov 2010,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/geoffrey-lean/8166926/Cancun-climate-change-talks-last-chance-in-the-snakepit.html

(5) "Climate change: Paris 'last chance' for action"

By Helen Briggs, BBC Environment Correspondent 22 April 2015

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32399909

 (6) "Bill McKibben: This Is Our Last Chance to Save the Planet"

By Start Making Sense and Jon Wiener APRIL 20, 2017

https://www.thenation.com/article/bill-mckibben-this-is-our-last-chance-to-save-the-planet/

(7) “Global Warming and Climate Instability: One Last Chance to Save Ourselves”

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null

Global Research, March 12, 2018, 

https://www.globalresearch.ca/global-warming-and-climate-instability-one-last-chance-to-save-ourselves/5631803

A compilation of “The hilarious legacy of ‘last chances’ for climate, exposed” by Anthony Watts, WUWT November 2, 2015,

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/02/the-hilarious-legacy-of-last-chances-for-climate-exposed/

Also a compilation of "last chance" as of June 2016,

http://climatechangepredictions.org/category/last_chance

And from The GWPF, March 5, 2018,

http://www.thegwpf.org/climate-industrial-complex-wasting-100-billion-and-shutting-down-debate-warns-lilley/

Among the precedent stories and scare made in the 1980s, the creation of UN IPCC. the UN FCCC in 1992, among the basis of "last chance to save the planet" report in 1992 by the New Scientist.

Sources: https://www.carbonbrief.org/warming-warning-1981-tv-documentary-warned-climate-change

https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm

Since this is a UN-sponsored alarmism and scam, parroted by almost all governments in the planet +  many showbiz and media personalities + many environmental NGOs, this scam will continue in the decades to come. So I think this will be among the news headline in the future:

2030: "This will be our last chance to save the planet"

2040: "Our last-last chance to save the planet"

2050: "Only 1 year left to really save the planet"

..... J

And these "planet saviours" -- UN and government climate negotiators, environmental NGOs, academics, media, consultants, etc. -- tell us that we should have more expensive energy, more unstable-intermittent-subsidy-dependent energy, more expensive e-jeepneys and e-tricycles, more climate bureaucracies and bureaucrats, more endless global climate junkets.

Meanwhile, here's is the latest data on global air temperature, the lower troposphere as of end-February 2018, UAH data.

YEAR MO GLOBE NHEM. SHEM. TROPICS

2017 11 +0.36 +0.33 +0.38 +0.26
2017 12 +0.41 +0.50 +0.33 +0.26
2018 01 +0.26 +0.46 +0.06 -0.12
2018 02 +0.20 +0.24 +0.15 +0.03

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2018/03/uah-global-temperature-update-for-february-2018-0-20-deg-c/

----------------

See also:
Climate Tricks 62, Climate religionism of Arcy Garcia, July 02, 2017 
Climate Tricks 63, The search for huge climate money in COP 23, November 26, 2017 
Climate tricks 64, Bitter cold and snow are caused by AGW, January 06, 2018

May prosperity continue in 2018 and beyond

Belated happy new year, readers and friends.

I think 2017 in general was a good year in terms of national and global prosperity (sorry pessimists). So I hope for more peace and prosperity, more wealth, less conflict and fake news in 2018.

Forget all types of alarmism -- "peak food" and Malthusian then Ehrlichian hunger alarmism, "peak oil" and oil wars alarmism, HIV/AIDS alarmism, NCDs (non-communicable diseases) alarmism, climate alarmism (less rain or more rains, no flood or more floods, we send more money to the UN and governments), poverty alarmism, inequality alarmism, etc.

I observe that the world has entered a period of rising prosperity and less war since about 2-3 decades ago, and the pace of global prosperity is rising faster per decade. Before, the poor ride cow de carabao or bicycles, now the poor ride motorcycles or e-bikes or 3rd-hand cars, or at least commute in air-con buses and vans.

This chart is from The Economist.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/12/daily-chart-2

From the Financial Times, Dec. 30, 2017:

Global stocks ending bumper year on a high

FTSE All-World index gains most since 2009 as economic activity accelerates

"Global stocks this year enjoyed their best annual performance since the post-crisis (2009) recovery, as accelerating economic growth across the world helped power several major markets to double digit gains... The biggest driver of the roaring stock market rally has been the accelerating growth in the US, Europe and Asia."

https://www.ft.com/content/e089ac44-ecba-11e7-8713-513b1d7ca85a

Climate Tricks 62, Climate religionism of Arcy Garcia

Some people have deep faith in the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) or "man-made only" warming and climate change (CC), deep faith like religion. Natural global warming-global cooling cycles, or nature-made warming and CC is taboo for them, no such thing, it violates their religion and will never never accept it even if hard data and graphs are in front of them.

Among such climate religionists is Arcy Garcia. Arcy is a friend way back in the late 80s when I was still a socialist. While we have some similar beliefs like respect for human rights and opposition to Du30's no-due-process, no rule of law and violent drugs war, his socialist and anti-capitalist angsts prevail. A typical anti-capitalist ideologue who super-enjoys facebook capitalism, youtube capitalism, google and internet capitalism, etc.

What he does, he would tag me in fb arguing the usual UN-Al Gore hypothesis that AGW is so scary-alarming-worrying-frankensteining and the only solution is more UN, more governments to control, over-regulate and over-tax and later on kill fossil fuels, and they can "fight CC".

Initially I engaged him, then he would run away when faced with dozens of paleo-climate data dating back to tens of thousands or millions of years ago. Then after a few days or weeks, he would tag me again and argue the same AGW alarmism and so I would show him again lots of hard data, paleo-climate data showing that global warming is not unprecedented, there were many precedents of GW.

I would ask him and other climate alarmists of these simple questions, and they would have zero answer, or the usual sound of silence.

1. Planet Earth is 4.6 billion years old, when was the time, what period, that there was NO climate change?

2. What was it like before this "man-made" warming/CC -- less rain, no rain, more rains? less flood, no flood, more floods? less snow, no snow, more snow?

3. Of the recent global warming from the mid-1800s to roughly the last decade, how much of it was man-made vs nature-made? 100-0? 80-20? 51-49?

Then he would run away. And repeat the process --> tag, argue briefly, run away; tag, argue briefly, run away.

Today, he did the same, posting this.

I advised and reminded him of his lousy style. He can continue his climate religionism and alarmism in his own wall, sure he has many follower-climate religionists who will cheer him. But he puts it again in my wall with the usual plan to run away when confronted with hard data, so I told him of his climate kaduwagan at kabobohan (climate stupidity and cowardice).

I asked him again just one question -- Planet Earth is 4.6 billion years old, when was the time, what period, that there was NO climate change?

His slippery answer, “Masyadong malayo 4b years. Mas kapani paniwala yung unti unting pag atras.”

Palusot pero hindi lusot. There is data for 4+ billion years but he won't accept it because it disproves their religion -- that there was no previous CC, no warming precedents, "this GW and CC is unprecedented" they argue. 

More data here, https://wattsupwiththat.com/paleoclimate/. Zero discussion, just dozens of charts and data and their sources.

After this, I am sure that whenever he finds another alarmist article, he will post it again in my fb wall, then he will run away again.

But then again, AGW is religion, based on faith and belief. People who believe in a God do not ask for charts or graphs or tables or equations, they just have faith, simple. This is AGW religionism, "man-made CC only" religion and cultism. And they use governments, the UN, the foreign aid like WB and ADB, for their religion. And vice versa, governments-UN-foreign aid use the religion to extract more political power, more global ecological central planning, more multi-trillion dollars climate money from taxpayers and energy consumers so they can "save the planet."
----------------

See also:
Climate Tricks 59, Trump's climate advisor to reverse US government alarmism, January 20, 2017 
Climate Tricks 60, Alarmism by the socialists and global ecological central planners, January 28, 2017 
Climate Tricks 61, Hysteria and tantrums over Trump's withrawal from Paris Agreement, June 02, 2017

Climate Tricks 61, Hysteria and tantrums over Trump's withrawal from Paris Agreement

Finally, US President Donald Trump has officially dumped the Paris Agreement of 2015. He declared yesterday,

“We will cease honoring all non-binding agreements”, and “will stop contributing to the green climate fund”.

“The bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair to the United States”.

“This agreement is less about climate and more about other countries getting a financial advantage over the United States”.

“The agreement is a massive redistribution of United States wealth to other countries.”

“Compliance with the terms of the Paris accord… could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025.”

“India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid.”

“We need all forms of available American energy or our country will be at grave risk of brown-outs and black-outs.”

“Withdrawing is in economic interest and won’t matter much to the climate.”

“We will be environmentally friendly, but we’re not going to put our businesses out of work… We’re going to grow rapidly.”

“Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia, & across the world should not have more to say w/ respect to the US economy than our own citizens.”

“It is time to exit the Paris Accord and time to pursue a new deal which protects the environment, our companies, our citizens.”
------------
The agreement funds a UN Climate Slush Fund underwritten by American taxpayers

• President Obama committed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund – which is about 30 percent of the initial funding – without authorization from Congress
• With $20 trillion in debt, the U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to subsidize other countries’ energy

The deal also accomplishes LITTLE for the climate

• According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by less than .2 degrees Celsius in 2100.

When I checked the US stockmarkets yesterday... Did the investors cheer Trump's decision?


I am actually an agnostic about President Trump's policies in many sectors but when it comes to climate and energy policies, I support him. Planet Earth has experienced climate change many times since it was born some 4.6 billion years ago. How can the UN and governments fight something that naturally occurs?

The higher the climate alarmism, the higher the climate extortion becomes. $100 billion/year starting 2020 on top of promised foreign aid to developing. Many governments of developed countries are angry at Trump's decision because they promised a lot, they raised expectations a lot, even if they do not have such big money or cannot squeeze more taxes from their people to give away. They only expected that US taxpayers will shoulder a big portion of such climate extortion. 

Now the annual huge parties and junkets involving thousands of "planet saviours" aka annual UNFCCC meetings will be pared down. No more $ hundreds of millions a year of US taxpayers' money to bankroll their huge parties and junkets.

As expected, lefties' and alarmists' heads blew and hysteria, angst and tantrums were flying anywhere. See a short compilation of such hysteria at WUWT,The craziest reactions to Trump pulling out of the #ParisAgreement

When I posted this subject in my fb wall, one alarmist stranger Cesar Cifra unloaded a series of personal attacks.

This Cifra is a friend of my friend and fellow UPSE alumni Romy Bernardo. I asked for data (like below, last 4,000 years global temp.) and this Cifra responded with ad hominems, what a lousy and low-life mind.

http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/Images/Main/Warm_periods.jpg

Anyway, this Trump decision is a big blow to the climate alarmism and global ecological socialism movement. A big blow to the UN and many governments whose revised purpose of existence is to tax-tax-tax their citizens as much as possible to "fight climate change" even if CC has been happening naturally, cyclically, for the past 4.6 B years.
------------ 

See also:
Climate Tricks 58, Inability to disprove past global warming precedents, December 16, 2016
Climate Tricks 59, Trump's climate advisor to reverse US government alarmism, January 20, 2017 
Climate Tricks 60, Alarmism by the socialists and global ecological central planners, January 28, 2017

Climate Tricks 60, Alarmism cannot produce data of "unprecedented warming"

One of the persistent but debunked claims by the climate alarmism movement is that the recent, modern warm period is "unprecedented warming", meaning there were no precedents in global warming. A friend for instance commented in my fb thread about Earth Hour, "The level of CO2 heats up the Earth's atmosphere and we have record high temperatures. 2015 was a record high then until we got data from 2016 and, 2017 maybe even higher."

I asked him these two questions: (1) What time or period of planet Earth's 4.6 B years that there was NO climate change? You have alternative data to this, 700 M years climate data?

(2) What was it like before this "man-made" CC and "unprecedented warming": less rain, no rain, more rains? less flood, no flood, more flood? Proof and scientific papers?

He replied and answered Q1 that indeed, there was no time or period that climate did not occur in the 4.6 B years of Earth's existence. Then he added, "remember when humans appeared on earth it's activities affected its atmosphere after it invented fire. Before, it was an awesome balance but man adversely affected this balance."

And his indirect answer to Q2, "Before, it was an awesome balance." Wow, from what source? And what is that reference period of "before", 100 years ago? 1,000 years, 1 M year, or 100 M years ago, or farther?

Similar claims would be "we have stronger and stronger typhoons, cyclones and hurricanes" -- ok, compared to when? Compared to 100 years ago? 1,000 years ago? 1 M years? Any scientific baseline? scientific source/s?

Another friend asked, "Did our interventions and activities quicken the pace of climate change?"

When you say "quicken the pace of cc", they mean there is less rain, less flood, than say 1,000 or 1 M years ago? Or more rain, more flood? This is the planet's climate cycle since 1 M years ago.

He insisted to introduce the "human variable" in the discussion, to see how human activities affected the natural climate cycle. Well, the "human variable" is here, at the far end of the chart, past 700 M years data. Current CO2 levels are far far lower compared to that period. What's so scary here? 

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFo.../PageMill_Images/image277.gif

Here's a shorter timeframe, past 5,000 years. The "human variable" is at the far right of the chart. How different is it compared to the Medieval warm period? compared to the Roman warm period? 

http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/.../Main/Warm_periods.jpg

Data above say that recent or the past century's warming was nothing scary, nothing alarming, nothing frankensteining compared to past warming thousands and millions of years ago as claimed by the climate alarmists and scammers. 

-------------

See also:

Climate Tricks 57, Inability to disprove past global warming precedents, December 16, 2016 

Climate Tricks 58, Trump's climate advisor to reverse US government alarmism, January 20, 2017 

Climate Tricks 59, Alarmism by the socialists and global ecological central planners, January 28, 2017

Earth Hour 8, Celebrate darkness vs modernization

Earth Hour 2017 by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is two days away and yet last night, while I was having dinner with my daughter at a resto at SM Mall of Asia (MOA), the waiter informed us that they will shut off the lights from 7.30 - 8.30pm, for "Earth Hour", we can transfer to a table outside where the mall's exterior and street lights are on and bright. I said they should have informed me earlier so I could cancel my order because I don't believe in that stupid "celebrate darkness" campaign. Waiter went out, talked to management, came back and said they wont shut off the lights inside, only the shop sign outside. Good.

For me, this is the best EH photo. Celebrate darkness even for 1 hour is idiotic. But since campaigners do not really shut off lights 100%, only about 50% so they can have their speeches and singing to protect the planet from the "evils of fossil fuels" as they went to various venues on cars, buses, motorcycles that run on fossil fuel, it's only a half-idiotic campaign.

If "celebrate darkness" to "save the planet" is a good thing, then campaigners like WWF and Henry Sy family should do it every night, 365 nights a year, not just 1 hour a year. Darkness is the bliss of cave men and women, and double talk people among us who criticize if not hate modernity but cannot shake off their love affair with facebook, youtube, emails, cars, plane rides, etc.

Electricity and modernity allowed us to have a wealthier, more comfortable world. If people think riding cars or buses or jeeps that run on fossil fuel is bad, they should stop riding those vehicles and use only bicycles, skateboards and running shoes.

EH is not an ordinary "awareness campaign", rather it is one of the major anti-fossil fuel, kill coal, over-tax oil campaigns. Which have implicit and explicit ramifications in our energy, transportation and industrialization policies. Expensive electricity from unstable, intermittent sources should be embraced by the public. Even if those intermittent sources can ensure blackouts 100% if back up fossil fuel plants are not around.

Climate change (CC) is about global warming, global cooling, warming, cooling,... endless cycles for the past 4.6 billion years. With or without humans and their cars, malls, boats, planes and coal or nuke power plants. CC is natural or nature-made, not man-made.

One friend complained why I cannot respect the other view. Well for private citizens or civil society actions without national and global coercion, I don't mind. But those campaigns and advocacies have plenty of coercive components, like us taxpayers paying for the endless global climate meetings and junkets by government climate and environment officials and their staff, their offices and perks. Or government forcing us to pay higher electricity bills monthly to give endless subsidies to renewables.

Another friend argued that we humans are "hastening changes that in turn threaten our very existence." Uhmmm, exactly 101 years before Haiyan/Yolanda, Nov. 1912, also in Leyte, when total PH population that time was perhaps only 10M or less, when CO2 concentration was much lower, these things happened.

The WWF, Greenpeace, other groups make huge money by deceiving and convincing the public that if there are less rain, no rain or no flood, there is scary "man-made" CC so people should send them money. If there are more rains, more flood, there is also scary "man-made" CC so people should send them money. They campaign to fight less rain and more rain, fight less flood and more flood, fight less cold and more cold, fight less snow and more snow. Whatever the weather and climate, we should be scared and worried and alarmed, and they are the big planet saviours.

So the EH is part of a global fund raising campaign. WWF positions itself as a big planet saviour so it needs big money. CC alarmism, ditching the natural and cyclical nature of CC is about 95% political science and 5% climate science. The ultimate goal is more government, more UN, more global ecological central planning. That is why it is common to see WWF officials migrating to high government officials and vice versa.
------------

See also:
Earth Hour 5: Celebrating Darkness is not Wise, March 30, 2012 
Earth Hour 6: The WWF can Change Climate Change?, March 29, 2015 
Earth Hour 7, Lesson in basic electrical engineering, March 21, 2016

Climate Tricks 60, Alarmism by the socialists and global ecological central planners

Socialists and trying-hard anti-capitalism ideologues in facebook, youtube, etc. who also severely enjoy facebook capitalism, youtube capitalism, keep harping about "man-made" warming/climate change (CC) and thus, demand more government and UN ecological + energy central planning.

Like this report posted by Arcy Garcia.

As usual, palusot pero hindi lusot. Why?

1. No charts of temperature anomaly, only sketches and drawings.

2. Title is 4.5 B years, fine, but the sketches start only in past 20,000 years.

3. "Earth's warming at unprecented levels", no chart or table to show; unprecedented, no precedent? Scam statement.

And for the nth time, I've been asking Arcy and other "planet saviours":

(1) Planet Earth is 4.6 B years old, when, what period that there was no CC?
(2) What was it before this "man-made" CC -- less rain, no rain, more rains? less flood, no flood, more flood? less snow, no snow, more snow? Less dogs, no dog, more dogs? 

And for the nth time, Arcy and all climate evangelists have no answer. No climate alarmist has ever answered those questions honestly.

Some paleo-climate data showing warming-cooling cycle in the past. The climate alarmists close their eyes if the data do not support their "man-made" CC religion. 140k years ago. 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/.../KkU.../s1600-h/Vostok-140Kc.jpg

400k years data. 

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/.../temp/vostok/graphics/tempplot5.gif

1 million years data.  These guys have faith, strong faith in the words of Al Gore and the UN. 

http://serc.carleton.edu/.../proxies/milankovich_cycles.png

65 million years data. 

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/tempvsco267m.gif

543 million years data.

http://www.biocab.org/SL_and_CO2.jpg

700 million years data.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif

Finally, here's the 4.6 B years timescale. Warming-cooling, endless natural cycle.

http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg

See more data here, https://wattsupwiththat.com/paleoclimate/.

What the data and charts above show is that even if 100% of all power plants in the world are from fossil fuels, global cooling will still happen. And even if 100% of all energy in the planet is from hydro, wind, other renewables, global warming will still happen. But then religionists and climate evangelists will always have zero appreciation for data. Only faith, strong faith in the words of Al Gore and UN bible. 

Why? Money, money, money. Hypocrisy-robbery.

http://funwithgovernment.blogspot.com/2015/01/climate-tricks-37-climate-money-and.html

Huge extortion racket, via governments, the UN and other multilaterals.

--------------

See also:

Climate Tricks 57, "Preventing flash floods" and the Green SONA, August12, 2016 

Climate Tricks 58, Inability to disprove past global warming precedents, December 16, 2016 

Climate Tricks 59, Trump's climate advisor to reverse US government alarmism, January 20, 2017

Energy 81, Trump's climate and energy policies

Anthropogenic or "man-made" climate change (CC) hypothesis is actually 5% climate science and 95% political science. A realistic view is that CC is natural (ie, 'nature-made') and cyclical (warming-cooling-warming-cooling...). So a change in political leadership of one of the major players will significantly increase the % share of real climate science and reduce the share of political science.

Some big news reports a day after Donald Trump was elected as the next US President.

"While vowing to “cancel” the international Paris climate accord Obama championed, Trump would also rearrange domestic energy and environmental priorities. He wants to open up federal lands to oil and gas drilling and coal mining. He wants to eliminate regulations he calls needless. He would scrap proposed regulations for tighter methane controls on domestic drillers. And he wants to shrink the role of the Environmental Protection Agency to a mostly advisory one and pull back the Clean Power Plan, Obama’s proposed plan to push utilities toward lower carbon emissions." https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../trump-victory.../

"Global markets were thrown into disarray as results from the U.S. poured in. Wind turbine makers led the biggest declines in five months. Vestas Wind Systems A/S dropped 9.7 percent Wednesday after dropping 8.1 percent Tuesday when management announced a bleaker outlook for next year." http://www.bloomberg.com/.../trump-victory-seen...

"Shares in Vestas Wind Systems A/S plunged after U.S. voters unexpectedly propelled Republican nominee Donald Trump to the presidency, sparking concern that the renewable- energy industry will face future political headwinds.

The world’s biggest maker of wind turbines fell as much as 14 percent and traded 6.6 percent lower at 440.10 kroner as of 12:50 p.m. in Copenhagen. Stock of the Danish company already lost ground last week after U.S. polls tightened, bringing this year’s declines to about 10 percent." http://www.bloomberg.com/.../vestas-sinks-as-trump...

"On climate change, abandoning the Paris Treaty would be primarily of symbolic importance, since implementation has always been the biggest obstacle. China’s announcement of a 19% increase in coal capacity over the next five years demonstrates just how little committed many of the signers are. Possibly, President Trump will try to reduce federal support for renewables, but since that would cause the loss of many jobs and Congress has already extended the Production Tax Credit for five years, it’s not clear that much will be done, or at least not very quickly." http://www.forbes.com/.../what-will-president-trump.../...

  

Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley (UK) wrote:

1. U.S. withdrawal from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, from the Paris climate agreement and from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

2. Termination, on environmental and humanitarian grounds, of all Federal Government payments to foreign entities in connection with climate change... https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../in-light-of-recent.../

"Many years ago, Lord Monckton predicted America would be nation to lead the world to freedom from the anti-humanist greed of the green movement. Lord Monckton’s prediction has now come to pass.

In my native Australia, in Europe, across the world, in the bleak halls of the United Nations, the climate elite were gathering for one final great push to claim the future. Their plans are now in ruins." https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../09/the-end-of-the-green-age/

From Marc Morano: “Climate sanity has been restored to the U.S. No longer do we have to hear otherwise intelligent people in charge in DC blather on about how UN treaties or EPA regulations will control the Earth’s temperature or storminess." http://www.climatedepot.com/.../trump-wins-u-s.../

"The US president-elect "cannot prevent the implementation" of the landmark Paris pact, inked in the French capital last December, said Segolene Royal, France's environment minister and outgoing head of the UN climate forum.

"As I speak, 103 countries representing 70 percent of (greenhouse gas) emissions have ratified it, and he cannot -- contrary to his assertions -- undo the Paris Agreement," she told French radio station RTL." https://www.yahoo.com/.../climate-diplomats-push-back...

Their big problem is that hundreds of those "planet saviours" from developing countries, NGOs, etc were paid for by US taxpayers, courtesy of Pres. Obama's embrace of climate alarmism movement.

"Paris accord in limbo?

As for the Paris Climate Agreement, Trump can either ignore it or withdraw from further climate talks. Since Obama bypassed congress by calling it an accord—a treaty requires approval by the Senate—Trump could repeal the executive order Obama used to implement the agreement." http://us.blastingnews.com/.../here-s-what-a-trump...

"The bigger concerns, climate researchers, strategists and activists say, is if Trump prevents the U.S. from meeting its target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions or keeps the country from taking more ambitious climate action. The U.S. has promised to reduce emissions 26-28 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels, a goal many say may be within reach simply based on the market forces already pushing out older coal plants in favor of natural gas." https://insideclimatenews.org/.../marrakech-morocco... 

"SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America's water and environmental infrastructure."

http://www.npr.org/.../here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to...

"Seven actions to protect American workers:

....

★ FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

★ SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward.

★ SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fi x America’s water and environmental infrastructure."

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf

The climate alarmism movement with the goal of more UN, more government, more carbon taxation, more renewables cronyism, more and endless global climate junkets, more climate loans, would be reeling now because the "party might be over soon."

More real climate science, less political science. More market in science debates, less government interventions in debate.

-------------

See also:
Energy 78, AEMO on the S. Australia blackout last Sept. 28, October 13, 2016 
Energy 79, Germany Energiewende's €520 Billion Cost By 2025, October 17, 2016 
Energy 80, Power outages in 2010, October 21, 2016 
Spencer, Watts, Gosselin and Bastardi on Clinton vs. Trump, Elections 2016, November 05, 2016

BWorld 83, Climate change, the UN and 'Clexit'

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last September 08, 2016

Last weekend, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon declared during the G20 summit in China that “climate change scepticism is over.” This statement is wrong on two counts.

First, the term climate change (CC) skepticism or “CC denial” is wrong because skeptics recognize climate change, having happened in the past and currently taking place in the present. However, skeptics only believe that climate change is natural and cyclical, or it is “nature-made” and not man-made. Thus, the appropriate term should be “anthropogenic/man-made skepticism” and not “CC skepticism.”

Second, the debate is not over and was never settled.

If the debate is “over,” then how come that the UN (UNEP, WMO, IPCC, FCCC, etc.) could not answer (a) how much of current CC was man-made and nature-made? Is it 100-0, or 90-10, or 75-25, or 51-49? And (b) what was it like before this “man-made” CC, less flood, no flood, or more flood? Less storms, no storm, or more storms?

A Web site (http://wattsupwiththat.com/paleoclimate) used Greenland surface temperature as proxy for global temperature, and galactic cosmic rays’ (GCRs) volume.

GCRs are charged particles from exploding stars that wander through the universe including our solar system. They help in the formation of cloud cover in our planet, so that more GCRs mean more clouds. The presence of GCRs in the Earth’s atmosphere is regulated by the sun. Active sun through more total solar irradiance (TSI) means less GCRs that can enter the solar system and hence, less cloud, contributing to global warming. A weaker sun means more GCRs and hence, more clouds, contributing to global cooling.

Temperature changes in Greenland are measured in temperature anomaly (or deviation from the average temperature) while changes in GCRs are measured in carbon -14 anomaly (or deviation from the average volume of carbon -14). The author has shown there is correlation between GCRs count and Greenland temperature cycle of warming-cooling.

This correlation between GCRs and global temperature has been studied and shown by a known Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark many years ago, and followed up by hundreds of other papers by other physicists and geologists worldwide.

Recently, a group of scientists from the National Space Institute at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU Space) and the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has shown the link between large solar eruptions (or their absence) to changes in Earth’s cloud cover based on over 25 years of satellite observations. They wrote,

“Earth is under constant bombardment by particles from space called galactic cosmic rays. Violent eruptions at the sun’s surface can blow these cosmic rays away from Earth for about a week. Our study has shown that when the cosmic rays are reduced in this way there is a corresponding reduction in Earth’s cloud cover. Since clouds are an important factor in controlling the temperature on Earth our results may have implications for climate change,“explains lead author on the study Jacob Svensmark of DTU. (Source: WUWT, “Svensmark publishes: Solar activity has a direct impact on Earth’s cloud cover,” Aug. 25.)

These and other scientific studies show that all the huge annual climate meetings of the UN and national governments for many years are based on questionable if not wrong hypothesis and assumption that natural factors like the Sun, GCRs, clouds, water vapor, are not the main drivers of planet Earth’s climate, that it is only human emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) that drives the “unprecedented, unequivocal” global warming. Therefore, their solution that more UN and governments’ interventions, taxation, and regulations will “fight man-made” warming and CC is wrong.

And that is how various global associations and alliances of independent-minded scientists and NGOs were formed. The most recent of which is “Clexit,” http://clexit.net/.

Inspired by “Brexit” or Britain’s exit from the huge EU bureaucracy, “Clexit” or Climate Exit from UN FCCC, the climate alarmism and energy cronyism was formed last August.

Here is part of the summary statement made by Viv Forbes, Founding Secretary of “Clexit”:

“For developing countries, the Paris Treaty would deny them the benefits of reliable low-cost hydrocarbon energy, compelling them to rely on biomass heating and costly weather-dependent and unreliable power supplies, thus prolonging and increasing their dependency on international handouts. They will soon resent being told to remain forever in an energy-deprived wind/solar/wood/bicycle economy.

“Perhaps the most insidious feature of the UN climate plan is the “Green Climate Fund.” Under this scheme, selected nations (“The rich”) are marked to pour billions of dollars into a green slush fund. The funds will then be used to bribe other countries (“developing and emerging nations”) into adopting silly green energy policies.

“Carbon dioxide does not control the climate. It is an essential plant food and more carbon dioxide will produce more plant growth and a greener globe.”

“Clexit” now comprises 158 members from 23 counties. The “Clexit” Committee is headed by Dr. Václav Klaus, an econometrician and former prime minister and president of the Czech Republic, as Hon. Patron. “Clexit” President is Christopher Monckton from UK, an expert reviewer for the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report on CC and author of numerous peer-reviewed papers on climate sensitivity and mitigation.

The few but deep members of “Clexit” include the following:

• Official IPCC reviewers but dissented from the final public IPCC reports prepared by political appointees.

• Meteorologists, climatologists, physicists, radiation experts, climate modelers, and long-range forecasters who show that the assumptions and forecasts of the greenhouse-driven computer models are faulty.

• Organic chemists, biologists, physicians, naturalists, graziers, foresters and farmers who know that extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is beneficial for Earth’s biosphere.

• Sea level history and measurement experts who can prove that there is nothing unusual or alarming about current fluctuations in sea levels.

• Geologists and geographers who have studied eons of climate history via ice cores, stratigraphy, paleontology, deep-sea drilling, historical records, glaciers, ice sheets and landscapes and can show that CC is normal and today’s climate is not extreme or unusual.

• Astrophysicists, geologists, and researchers who have studied the cycles of ice ages and the climate effects of the Milankovitch cycles in Earth’s orbit -- obliquity, eccentricity and precession, and say that the 1,000 year climate averages are trending towards the next glacial epoch of the Pleistocene Ice Age.

• Medical researchers who point to evidence that exposure to cold are up to 20 times more lethal than exposure to heat.

• Power engineers and logistics experts who say that wind and solar power cannot run modern industrial societies, modern transport, or big cities except by installing massive overcapacity and gigantic transmission webs at exorbitant costs. 100% wind/solar is a recipe for blackouts and starvation.

• Politicians, businessmen, columnists, lawyers, army officers, and bloggers who see that this political agenda will destroy the freedoms we cherish.

The formation of “Clexit” was not prompted or supported by any industry, corporation, group or lobby nor have they had any say in the association’s statements or conclusions.

The “anthropogenic CC” camp is driven by a desire for more, bigger UN, and governments. They desire more government regulations, taxation or subsidy of energy, transportation, manufacturing, down to micro household lifestyle.

A “Clexit” is a way to regain scientific objectivity, economic rationality, and protect individual and enterprise freedom from ever-expanding UN and governments, local and national.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal Government Thinkers, a SEANET Fellow and “Clexit” temporary regional director for Southeast Asia.

-------------

See also: 

BWorld 70, Wind power firms corner billions of FIT money, July 09, 2016
BWorld 76, Solar can never power the PH and Asia, August 06. 2016 

BWorld 79, Brownouts, coal power and the electricity market, August 21, 2016 

BWorld 80, Declining share of agriculture in GDP, September 11, 2016 

BWorld 81, Property rights are human rights, September 30, 2016 

BWorld 82, No FIT for geothermal and other renewables, please, October 02, 2016