Post-modern science and the scientific legitimacy of the IPCC’s WG1 AR5 draft report

The meaning of pattern recognition in a complex system seems to be lacking it's due attention in climate research

Herewith I bring to your attention a working paper on perspectives of the continuation of climate change discussions that seems so far to have escaped  the attention of scientific institutions and policymakers.

It is entitled:
Post-modern science and the scientific legitimacy of the IPCC’s WG1 AR5 draft report
with the major recommendation:

“that assessment studies on climate change should be undertaken by individual nations, quite independently from the IPCC, as India has already foreshadowed. These reviews would best be undertaken by senior and established scientists whose reputation rests on the traditional [enabling] disciplines upon which climate science is founded that underpin(underpin is a favourite IPCC term and not very meaningful) climate science, specifically physics, chemistry, geology astronomy, solar physics and meteorology. The audit assessments should adhere to the traditional principles of science, and should focus on the scientific methodology and empirical evidence that bear on hypothetical Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW).”                                   Lees verder »

16 scientists address the presidential candidates in remarkable article in The Wall Street Journal

Today The Wall Street Journal published a strong appeal to the US presidential candidates to choose for a rational stand on climate policy, signed by a group of distinguished climate scientists. Amongst them some well known sceptics, like Lindzen and Kininmonth, some American hero’s like astronaut and senator Schmitt, and Burt Rutan, the builder of SpaceShipOne. No less than six of the scientists are from outside the US.

We had our own “coming out” of scientists as a reaction to the misleading climate brochure of the Dutch Academy of Science KNAW a few months ago, and there are more similarities between both events than just the subscription of Henk Tennekes, former director of the Dutch Meteorological Service KNMI. In both cases the subscribers insist that the threat of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is over exaggerated by scientists related to the IPCC, and plea for a return to solid and independent science, after years of stealth advocacy science.

There is also a difference: the article published today, points a strong finger at the habit of many influential alarmist scientists of suppressing unwelcome opinions, by practices that can only be considered as unscientific and morally doubtful. This very practice, by the way, accounts for the limited number of scientists speaking out publicly about their doubts concerning the mainstream view on global warming.

Although its effectiveness can be doubted (president Obama will not change his stand, and the republicans do not need any encouragement to dismiss climate policy), the article is a positive “sign of the times”, that will hopefully inspire many other scientists, who have so far been silent.

For the entire article,  read here: Lees verder »

Eminent BBC journalist attacts media for one-sided information on climate change

The last days of 2011 bring us one more nice present: even inside the climate-infatuated BBC things start to rumble.
The subjoint column of BBC anchorman Michael Buerk illustrates the wider movement in public opinion, resulting in ever more people getting fed up with being patronised and infantilized by the medea.
It is an honest, impressive cry of heart by a genuinely worried man.

(copied from this blog by Hans Labohm on De Dagelijke Standaard)

Verrassend betoog van BBC anchorman over de infantilisering van de burger door de alarmistische media

Het einde van 2011 brengt ons wederom een mooi cadeau: ook binnen de klimaatverdwaasde BBC begint het te rommelen. Onderstaand betoog staat voor de brede beweging in de publieke opinie van het laatste jaar, waarbij men het zo zoetjesaan zat begint te worden om door de media betutteld en infantiel behandeld te worden.
Een eerlijke, indrukwekkende en emotionele oproep van een oprecht verontrust man.

Verplicht leesvoer voor wie een begrijpelijke en persoonlijke benadering van de klimaatdiscussie zoekt.

(Overgenomen uit  dit blog van Hans Labohm op Dagelijkse Standaard)

Michael Buerk is fed up with the one-sided climate policy of his own BBC

The Fifth Column – Michael Buerk (BBC) on the Climate Summit

The latest so-called Climate Summit, that’s been taking place in Durban, hasn’t made many waves. It could be because global warming seems less daunting if you can no longer afford heating bills. It could also be that we’re getting fed up with the bogus certainties and quasi-religious tone of the great climate change non-debate.

Now, I don’t know for certain that man’s activities are causing the planet to heat up. Nobody does. We simply cannot construct a theoretical model that can cope with all the variables. For what it’s worth, I think anthropogenic warming is taking place, and, anyway, it would be a good thing to stop chucking so much bad stuff into the atmosphere.

What gets up my nose is being infantilized by governments, by the BBC, by the Guardian that there is no argument, that all scientists who aren’t cranks and charlatans are agreed on all this, that the consequences are uniformly negative, the issues beyond doubt and the steps to be taken beyond dispute. You’re not necessarily a crank to point out that global temperatures change a great deal anyway. A thousand years ago we had a Mediterranean climate in this country; 200 years ago we were skating every winter on the Thames. And actually there has been no significant rise in global temperatures for more than a decade now.

We hear a lot about how the Arctic is shrinking, but scarcely anything about how the Antarctic is spreading, and the South Pole is getting colder.

Droughts aren’t increasing. There are fewer of them, and less severe, than a hundred years ago. The number of hurricanes hasn’t changed, the number of cyclones and typhoons has actually fallen over the last 30 years. And so on.     Lees verder »

Well attended meeting on December 12th supports request for retraction of climate brochure

(Adapted from this  Dutch blog on December 13th)

Seminar in the Dutch parlemental press center                       Lees verder »

KNAW report about climate change containing serious scientific errors was presented to Dutch parliament

(English version of this blog in Dutch, with credits to Albert Jacobs for the initial translation)

Last week the Dutch academic counsel presented a report to the Dutch parliament, stating that it contained impartial,  detailed, scientific and accurate information about the present state of climate science. In reality the report portrayed the IPCC claims als being scientifically proven, and did so embedded in a tsunami of  scientific errors.

I will discuss the most striking ones.

The hard facts

The premise of the brochure is clear:

(P. 8 ) …. With this brochure the Academy, as an “honest broker” in knowledge, wants to give you as reliable a picture as possible of the situation on climate change. What do we know, and how sure are we of that? Where are the real controversies, and why are they there? ….

This brochure puts the scientific, “hard” facts about our climate in a row, and highlights the controversies and uncertainties in climate research at issue which you also encounter in the media. ….

The final section contains seven related propositions on climate change – issues which science agrees on.

So, the authors claim to present hard, scientifically proven conclusions. But this claim  does not hold.        Lees verder »

English remake of this blog (in Dutch) from september 10th, 2010

“Despite all I will talk about tonight regarding carbon capture and renewable energy, I am expecting a continued failure to achieve a global CO2 reduction”

This remarkable caveat was the opening statement of Dr Mark Jaccard, IPCC author and renewable energy expert. Jaccard has been an advisor to the Chinese government for over 15 years, and is involved in the planning of the future Chinese energy mix.

Dr Jaccard spoke at a seminar on the topic of “The Chinese energy revolution” and the very important lesson that can be learned from his lecture is that there is a solid connection between China’s energy policy and worldwide CO2 reduction.                  Lees verder »

English version

(Published earlier in slightly different form in O2 Magazine, June 2011, and on this website, in Dutch, June 27th)

Mankind currently uses so much energy that it escapes every imagination. The rounded figures for 2010 can be found below, and whether it would be a thousand times more or a thousand times less, would not makes any difference for your perception. This lack of sense of scale, quite often tends to lead to the easy assumption that a certain sympathetic energy source, or reducing our energy footprint, is the solution to all our energy problems. This makes it hard to have a meaningful discussion about the world’s energy supply.

In this article I will try to identify the real options for the world’s energy supply in 2050.

Lees verder »