Climate Discussion Group 2024, CDG2024
Discussion - Policy P1
October - November 2024
1) General
Nov. 7, 2024
John Droz USA
Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues
Considering the mess that Progressives have left America in, it could be difficult to know where to start fixing things. My view is that (other than adequately addressing the immigration disaster), our departure from real Science is arguably the most impactful matter that needs to be properly resolved.
Science is a process. The point of the Science process is to give the public the best understanding of the technical truths of our existence. But that is not happening!
Just a few real-world examples of this should convey the enormous adverse consequences of this almost totally ignored issue:
Example #1: Our energy choices should be made based on what real Science indicates that our best options are. None of that is happening!
Example #2: Our concern about Climate Change should be resolved by applying real Science. Almost none of that is happening! November 9, 2024 1
Example #3: Our healthcare system (FDA, CDC, etc.) should be 100% focused on conveying to the public what real Science indicates is in their best interest.
Example #4: Our K-12 education system should be teaching our children what real Science is — which includes training them to be Critical Thinkers. Due to the widespread adoption (49 states!) of the NGSS, none of that is
To our profound detriment, what has replaced real Science is political Science. What that means is that technical matters are dealt with based on political correctness, on virtue signaling, on who profits, etc. None of these have anything to do with real Science, or what is in the best interest of the public and our country.
See full newsletter issue below
My Letter to RFK Jr.
Nov. 4, 2024
Douglas Lightfoot
Gerald Ratzer
Canada 1. Introduction
Since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 's First Assessment Report (FAR) in 1990, the reports have contained at least four significant mistakes that the IPCC has neither acknowledged nor corrected. These mistakes have been promoted so constantly that governments have come to believe they are true. The
Nov. 3, 2024
Paul Homewood
result is government policies that hurt their populations.
The situation is so bad that anyone who questions the IPCC results is attacked. Nevertheless, examining the IPCC results has led to several papers identifying and correcting mistakes.
This document summarizes the IPCC's list of significant mistakes, with the hope that the IPCC will acknowledge and correct them.
A second purpose is to inform the climate science community about the extent and significance of the problem. Many papers by climate scientists do not provide this information.
7. Conclusions
This document identifies and includes four significant errors the IPCC made in its official reports: AR4, AR5, and TAR. These errors lead to unrealistic conclusions that are not supported by evidence. These uncorrected errors destroy the IPCC's credibility.
The IPCC must step up and acknowledge these mistakes, correct them, and apologize to the World’s people.
See full report at link below.
Some significant uncorrected errors by the IPCC
Advanced Briefing for COP29 Baku 2024
Negotiators from across the globe will gather in Baku,
9, 2024
Ron Clutz
UK, USA
Oct. 31, 2024
Christopher Monckton
UK
Azerbaijan, for the twenty-ninth annual UN climate change conference on November 11. COP29 marks the midpoint of the “COP Presidencies Troika,” a collaborative effort between the United Arab Emirates (UAE, host to COP28) and Brazil (host to COP30 in 2025) aimed at accelerating progress toward the 1.5°C goal. Unlike COP28 in Dubai last year, which hosted a record hundred thousand attendees, COP29 will be smaller, with Baku expected to host around fifty thousand participants.
There is no direct mention in the agenda of a transition from fossil fuels.
The main item up for debate is, as usual, money!
To: John Shanahan
Dear John, - Many thanks for getting in touch, and for connecting me with two such valiant and distinguished commanders in the Army of Light and Truth, Gerald Ratzer and Terigi Ciccone. This is the public-speaking season, so I am very busy until Christmas, but I propose to finalize and send to the group a copy of our paper on what my team considers to be the single most serious of many errors perpetrated by the climatological community. We have now obtained an independent moderator for our work: Dr John Dewey, FRS, emeritus professor of geology in the University of Oxford.
Dr Dewey heard of our work from a control engineer who had explained to him our discovery that, when climatologists had first attempted to borrow feedback formulism from control theory in electronic-engineering
November 9, 2024 4
physics they had fatally misunderstood it and had consequently overstated the contribution of feedback response to global warming by an order of magnitude, and had overstated global warming itself by a factor 2-3. He had at first been sceptical of our result and had asked to see the lead author. I took him out to lunch and explained the result. He asked to be sent a copy of the then draft paper. Within 24 hours, he had replied that he had read the paper, that the logic was remorseless and that it should be published.
However, he advised us that the paper should be shortened, and that all material not directly essential to the argument (such as derivation of initial conditions) should be stripped out and included in a series of supplemental notes. This work is now complete, and we are at the moment completing references and indexing. Once that is done, Professor Dewey will read the paper again (it is now only 3000 words, with some diagrams that he has described as very clear) and let us know of any further changes that need to be made.
I expect that all this will take about a week, for I am also heavily engaged on a parliamentary case, looking after a gentleman living in social housing in Edinburgh who had been falsely accused of possessing illegal pornographic images on his computer. His solicitor had abandoned him, and he was thinking of suicide. I am hoping to complete the latest phase of the work on his case this week, and shall thereafter have more time to seek the assistance of Gerald Ratzer's group in reviewing my team's result.
I shall be in touch with you all as soon as my head is above the parapet once more. Many thanks, and all the best for this excellent initiative, - Christopher
The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley Hobbit Court, Dyrham, Chippenham, SN14 8HE November 9, 2024
Oct. 30, 2024
original
Dec. 31, 2022
Jay Lehr
Terigi Ciccone
USA
Oct. 28, 2024
Vincent Drnevich
Africa is experiencing a type of technological colonialism, by some self-appointed do-gooders bullying Africans in order to deprive the continent of safe, inexpensive, and prolific energy. Some are finally starting to react against them. Will it be soon enough to allow the average African to rise to the standard of living we enjoy in the West?
Kelvin Kemm, a prominent nuclear engineer in South Africa, tells us what happens. European countries arrive in Africa and tell the citizens what they think is good for them, then threaten punitive economic measures if not done as they are told. African countries are instructed to cease using coal power and buy German wind turbines instead. In addition, they try and convince the Africans to start a new industry producing hydrogen though there are no buyers or realistic uses as an energy source. These fraudsters preach its vast potential, and some countries are buying this complete fraud. Kemm spoke at a green conference in Johannesburg where speakers from Switzerland, Germany, and France, amongst others, told the attendees that Africa must not be allowed to increase electricity production by more than 10%. Not 10% per year but 10% ever. A Swiss speaker told the audience that his country's lifestyle should not be followed. They should show the world how to live in harmony with nature and not build a modern infrastructure. He went on to say that the world's increasing total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) must be stopped, because growth in GDP was bad for the climate.
The Purposeful Impoverishment of African Nastions
To: The Editor
The Exponent
Purdue University
USA West Lafayette, Indiana, USA
Subject: Where is Purdue’s Climate Action Plan?
Dear Editor,
I read the Purdue Climate Change Plan article with interest. It is based solely on the findings of the IPCC where climate change is assumed to be caused by trace greenhouse gases, especially CO2.
There is an increasing number of respected climate scientists whose findings differ from those of the IPCC. One example is the work of Robert Ian Holmes of Australia whose work is summarized in this link. He points to the work of Nikolov and Zeller [who] provided a robust mathematical model of the earth’s climate based on measurable physical phenomena: the albedo of the earth, the atmospheric pressure, and the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI). These parameters drive the temperature of the earth, not fossil fuel generated CO2 in the atmosphere.
See this link for his original and other scientific papers related to this topic, most of which disagree that CO2 causes climate change.
If the above-described work is credible, then efforts to become carbon neutral will be of little use.
Carbon capture and sequestration will be wasted effort. That money would be better spent on education, healthcare, helping the poor, and infrastructure. It may be premature for Purdue to have a Climate Change Plan.
See full article here.
November 9, 2024
Oct. 25, 2024
Rafe
Champion, Jeff
Grimshaw
Australia