Letters

Response to Friends of the Earth

——————————————————————————— 

 

 

The Editor,

Chester Chronicle

 

18th April 2008.

 

Dear Editor,

 

Friend of the Earth Roberta Owen says King Canute was an arrogant twit who thought he could command the tide to stop rising. Not so. In fact he was a deeply religious man and it came to his notice that his courtiers thought him so powerful a king, he could control the tides. Canute knew his limitations so had his throne carried to the waters edge; as the tide came in he ordered the sea to retreat. When it did not, he had made his point; even a king was nothing compared to the power of his God.  Now we call it nature.

 

Friends of the Earth and like groups would do well to take note. They tell us if we all live our lives as they instruct, then they will control the temperature of our mighty planet. Arrogant indeed! The idea that taxes and treaties will control climate is absurd.

 

Satellites and weather balloons reveal there has been no global warming in the last ten years. Latest figures from the Argo series of three thousand buoys show oceans have been cooling for the last five years.

 

NASA has revised its temperature figures and we now learn than in the US – and likely worldwide – the hottest decade in the last one hundred was the Thirties not the Nineties. 

 

Polar ice caps are not melting; Arctic sea ice has now recovered and 2008 Antarctic sea ice extent was 30 % above the January average. A 2006 study of the ERS-2 satellite stats revealed Arctic sea levels were falling by 2 mm per year. The Antarctic interior is cooling and gaining ice; only the peninsula is showing a slight warming where it juts into the Southern Ocean.

 

Recent warmer winters in Europe were due to changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation and other ocean circulations though we have just seen the largest northern hemisphere January to January fall in temperature since records began in the 1880’s.

 

More and more climate scientists are now daring to speak out against the man-made warming myth which is based solely in the flawed computer models of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  Studying solar cycles – the real driver of climate – Russian Academy of Science and other experts tell us a period of global cooling will begin in 2012 and peak in 2055.  Sadly most of the media are still running in the hot direction whilst our planet is cooling.

 

The man-made warming industry knows the science is against them so they are joining together and becoming increasingly hysterical in their claims. A 2007 survey of 1,150 children found many were losing sleep over the man-made global warming myth which is nothing to do with saving the planet and everything to do with the leftist aim to destroy capitalism and tax and control us all into misery. Some groups really believe they are doing the right thing; others know the real aim.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Alwyn Davies

 

 

 

 

 

 

———————————————————–

JOINT PRESS RELEASE

by Professor David Bellamy and Mark Duchamp



European Commission cut from reality ?

 

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————-
To the Daily Post

Hi Eryl,
I see the “scientists” in our glorious universities are praising politician Gore again. See a report on Gore here from Viscount Monckton who dared to question propaganda from the IPCC and won.
He also found 35 errors in the Gore shockumentary,: An Inconvenient Truth which has been found seriously flawed by a British court of law. Why did our uni dons forget to mention that I wonder. Despicable.
When will journalists do a little research for themselves?
Glad to help.
A.

____________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Letter to The Times  – 20 December 2007

 

The last two weeks in Bali have seen the virtual obliteration in the media of any distinction between “climate change” (an observed reality) and “catastrophic manmade warming” (a disputed theory).  This elision has been driven by celebrities, ecowarriors, demonstrators, bureaucrats and politicians.  In the interests of sanity, may I draw attention through your columns to a few facts?

 

In distant ages, global temperatures swung violently between uninhabitably cold and warmer than now.  Since the end of the Little Ice Age in the 18th century they have been recovering unevenly at about 0.7 degrees C per century. It is scientifically credible that man has been making an added contribution to this warming since the industrial revolution, though we don’t know how much and there are many unexplained discrepancies, including the 1940-1975 cooling, the stabilisation of temperatures since 1998 and the failure of some significant phenomena to conform to the IPCC’s models.

 

The effects of the sun, water vapour, geothermal exchanges, aerosols, unreliable data series, oceanic and terrestrial carbon absorption, currents, volcanoes, etc. are all crucial but as yet little understood.  These elements interact in complex and mysterious ways.  Chaos theory rules.

 

It is therefore time to end false certainties and denunciation of those scientists (and countries) that question the consensus.   Taxpayers’ money would be best spent on independent research, clean water, forest protection, improved land use, flood defences and disease prevention rather than on pre-emptive avoidance, regardless of cost,  of an unlikely disaster that –  if it does occur    is probably beyond mankind’s control.

 

Lord Leach of Fairford

3 Lombard Street

London EC3V 9AQ

___________________________________________________ 

 From: “Hans ILMCD” <hans@ilovemycarbondioxide.com>
To: “Climate News” <
hans@ilovemycarbondioxide.com>
X-ASG-Orig-Subj: keeping up the fight for a debate
Subject: keeping up the fight for a debate

 

 

 

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:13:11 -0000
 
For your information.

This letter and the email version of it has been sent to UK policy makers, TV stations and national newspapers

with the subject header of “Desperate Cry For Debate”

OPEN LETTER TO POLICY MAKERS & THE MEDIA

(posted 3 December 2007, emailed 5 December 2007)

Dear Editors,
Global Warming Petition – signed by over 19,000 American scientists already:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/

Any person with a clear thinking brain will see that AGW is nonsense and there is unfortunately no need to be a climate scientist to understand that.
Look at it this way:


If CO2 causes the alleged positive feedback, then how come in our ever-changing climate as recorded by ice cores and sediment samples over the past hundreds of thousands of years, this has never happened, ever. If it had, we would not be here because the temperature would have continued rising to levels that are no longer capable of supporting life. The minute additional 110ppmv makes no difference to that observation. Historical levels have been far in excess of the current 381ppmv without tipping the scales, for obvious reasons.

As is well known now (finally), increased CO2 levels follow temperature rises (for obvious and well understood reasons), but the temperatures always come down again, despite the initially continued increase in CO2 levels, which then decrease again all by themselves following on from the lower temperatures.

Why oh why are so many people blinded by the AGW lobby?


Why oh why is there no proper debate on the issue?

When will one of you have the courage to organise a proper debate with scientists such as Dr Gray, Professor Bellamy and Professor Henderson, to name just three of thousands of top scientists of all disciplines who disagree with the IPCC and who would be more than willing to debate the issues?

 Do you really think that these scientists risk being vilified for the fun of it, come on?!

One more time, in case you don’t know what it is all about:

There is absolutely no scientifically proven evidence whatsoever that carbon dioxide has ever influenced the climate in more than a minute way, in line with its minute concentration in the atmosphere.

No evidence whatsoever, none, zippo, zilch, nada, niets, niks!

Reducing carbon emissions will not affect the climate in any way. It will have no effect whatsoever, can’t you see that? Can you not read with an open mind and do your own research?!

Or are you all in the pockets of the environmental lobbyists in the US and EU? Only reporting on what you get “fed” by the “right channels”?

Allow me to feed you these few pertinent extracts, in the sincere hope that it will awaken in you the utter sense of urgency with which an open debate has to be organised:

http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/unsoundscience3.pdf

By Dr V R Gray


“Despite persistent efforts, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has never succeeded in the task set to it by the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), of supplying sound scientific evidence for the belief that human emissions of greenhouse gases are harming the climate. The evidence that has been supplied is based on unsound scientific methods and mathematics. This paper is an attempt to summarise some of it.  The IPCC never makes “forecasts”. But this does not seem to worry the politicians and the general public who do not understand that the gut feelings of people financially dependent on models are the only basis for these “projections”. They cheerfully convert them in to certain forecasts, sufficient to consign the world to an economically damaging assault on energy supply.”


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeconaf/12/5012502.htm and

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=43&Itemid=31

By Professor David Henderson


Both the process and the milieu are now firmly in place. IPCC member governments have shown no disposition to question or amend them in the context of AR4, and the new report is likely to bear a close family relationship to its predecessors. This official backing for the IPCC is understandable. Since it was established in 1988, the Panel has come a long way. It has successfully produced three massive and agreed reports, covering a wide range of complex issues; it has secured for these reports and their conclusions the endorsement of its many and diverse member governments; it has informed the thinking of those governments and prompted decisions by them; it has created, and gained approval for, a well defined set of procedures for conducting its work; and in relation to issues of climate change it has become the sole source of information and advice that its member governments treat as authoritative. Its many participants and outside supporters can argue that it has created a world-wide consensus.

I would now question the idea that the IPCC has established a well-founded consensus across the whole range of issues relating to climate change, and indeed I doubt whether the achievement of such a consensus ought to be the aim. I have come to believe that the status that the IPCC has acquired, as an established monopoly provider of information and advice to governments, should be held in question.

In relation to climate change, an urgent present need is to build up a sounder basis than now exists for reviewing and assessing the issues. A process should be established, for informing and advising governments and public opinion alike, which is more objective, more representative, more rigorous and more balanced than that which the IPCC and its sponsoring departments and agencies have built up and shown themselves unwilling to change.

http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/mclean-disband_the_ipcc.pdf

By John McLean
The IPCC is a political lobby group whose members undertake research funded by governments and produce peer-reviewed scientific papers. Then teams of authors, including some of the original researchers, write reports based on those peer-reviewed papers and declare those reports to be an accurate summary of the field. In normal circumstances there would be howls of protest were authors permitted to review and promulgate their own work, and the summary documents would be automatically rejected on the grounds that the authors had vested interests. But this is how the IPCC has operated since its inception, in fact since its charter directed it to concentrate on the risks posed by any human influence on climate. Even worse, the IPCC has, via complaisant governments, skewed scientific research to concentrate on aspects of its own claims to the detriment of the wider science. Those claims have very little evidence to support them but such is the dominance of the IPCC that the targeted research has produced more experts in those fields and more scientific papers, potential authors and partisan reviewers through which the IPCC can sustain its claims. To top it all off the IPCC makes statements that imply a far more intense review process and far greater support for its claims than the evidence really shows. The bias and manipulation of climate science has gone on for long enough and the problems are too great to rectify from within. The only sensible course of action is to disband the IPCC. If we really must have a central body to co-ordinate the science then we need one that is independent and transparent, and encompasses all aspects of climate science rather than being fixated on an unproven human cause.”

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/klaus_freedom_endangered.pdf

by Vaclav Klaus

The dictates of political correctness are strict and only one permitted truth, not for the first time in human history, is imposed on us. Everything else is denounced. As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism.

The author Michael Crichton stated it clearly: “the greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fantasy, truth from propaganda”.

I feel the same way, because global warming hysteria has become a prime example of the truth versus propaganda problem. It requires courage to oppose the “established” truth, although a lot of people – including top-class scientists – see the issue of climate change entirely differently. They protest against the arrogance of those who advocate the global warming hypothesis and relate it to human activities.

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of  inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”. The issue of global warming is more about social than natural sciences and more about man and his freedom than about tenths of a degree Celsius changes in average global temperature.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/scaredtodeathreview.html

by John Brignell 


Authors such as your reviewer and James Le Fanu have contended that there was a sea change in western society that occurred in about 1982 and, sure enough, that is where this account begins. That was the year that the acronym AIDS was adopted and, by one of those ironic quirks of coincidence, on the very month that this book was issued the UN has finally admitted what the sceptics always knew, that it had grossly exaggerated the scale and nature of the epidemic. From that time on all hell broke loose, with an unending sequence of “disasters” – killer eggs, listeria hysteria, mad cows and human CJD, E. coli, The Millennium Bug, Satanic abuse, speed kills,  lead,  passive smoking, asbestos and finally the big one – Global Warming. This account spells out the progression, a lengthy tragicomedy of irony, incompetence and sheer perfidy. Each scare is analysed in terms of the pushers and the blockers through various stages.

 There were so many factors that were common to these outbreaks, not least in the consequences. There was draconian legislation, the mass closure of viable productive businesses, multiplication of officials supported by the taxpayer, the enrichment of lawyers, stepwise erosion of human liberty etc., all based on little or no evidence. There were mysterious multipliers, in which one case became millions, as with the early scare of salmonella in eggs (in fact, subsequent extensive surveys failed to produce any cases at all).

 Please know that I care nought for fame or fortune, but passionately for our precious planet Earth, which is being destroyed at breakneck speed, not by carbon emissions but through other issues that need to be addressed with even more urgency and compassion than the current fallacious emissions reduction and carbon trading schemes.

Emission reduction and carbon trading schemes are as much a crime against humanity as growing virgin agricultural crops in order to produce bio fuels (now finally recognised as such by a UN rapporteur as well as Oxfam. Please read about it for yourselves here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7065061.stm and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7072386.stm

Our precious planet needs urgent remedial action on many fronts, but reducing carbon emissions will not only make no difference to the climate, it will actually make matters worse by stifling development of social and economic models that stand at least a chance of making a difference to the well-being of all of us in the decades and centuries ahead.

PLEASE OPEN YOUR EYES AND YOUR MINDS TO WHAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT UNDER YOUR NOSES AND CALL FOR AN URGENT OPEN DEBATE, PLEASE! FOR FACTS SAKE!

IT IS ONLY AL GORE AND THE IPCC WHO SAY THE DEBATE IS OVER –

IT IS NOWHERE NEAR OVER, IN FACT IT HASN’T YET STARTED!

Kind regards,
Hans Schreuder
Ipswich, UK

Analytical Chemist (1966mMensa (1973)
this letter is also available online at: www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/pdf/openletter.pdf
Please also read the prophetic warning by climate scientists back in 1992 and the equally prophetic Heidelberg Appeal, both signed by the world’s top scientists: www.sepp.org/policy%20declarations/statment.html and www.sepp.org/policy%20declarations/heidelberg_appeal.html

LATEST NEWS 

29 November 2007
Full article here: http://forecastingprinciples.com/Public_Policy/PolBears.pdf

Pertinent excerpts (emphasis mine):
“In all, AMD violated 73 of the 90 forecasting principles we were able to rate. They used two un-validated methods and relied on only one polar bear expert to specify variables, relationships, and inputs into their models. The expert then adjusted the models until the outputs conformed to his expectations

“Green and Armstrong (2007) examined long-term climate forecasting efforts and were unable to find a single forecast of global warming that was based on scientific methods. The climate modelers’ procedures violated many forecasting principles and some of the violations were critical. This formal auditing result is consistent with earlier cautions. For example, Soon et al. (2001) found that the current generation of GCMs is unable to meaningfully calculate the climatic effects of added atmospheric carbon dioxide given severe limitations from both the uncertainties and unknowns in representing all relevant physical processes. There appears to be much uncertainty about the direction and extent of global mean temperature changes in the long-term (Soon et al. 2001), the most plausible forecast is that mean temperatures will remain much the same. In order to produce valid forecasts, it is necessary to use procedures that are consistent with accepted forecasting principles.

“Despite the lack of validity of unaided forecasts by experts, many public policy decisions are based on their predictions. Research on persuasion has shown that people have substantial faith in the value of such forecasts and that faith increases when experts agree with one another. Although they may seem convincing at the time, expert forecasts can, a few years later, serve as important cautionary tales.”

“Research since 1980 has added support to the Seer-sucker Theory. In particular, Tetlock (2005) recruited 284 people whose professions included, “commenting or offering advice on political and economic trends.” He asked them to forecast the probability that various situations would or would not occur, picking areas (geographic and substantive) within and outside their areas of expertise. By 2003, he had accumulated over 82,000 forecasts. The experts barely if at all outperformed non-experts and neither group did well against simple rules.”

My comments:

As a policymaker or a news organisation, you can continue to believe in Fairies, but the enclosed information is based on ACTUAL FACTS and this latest report is further proof of the fallacious nature of the AGW scaremongering tactics.


ASK YOURSELVES WHAT YOU STAND TO GAIN BY CONTINUING TO STICK YOUR HEADS IN THE SAND AND IGNORE THE FACTS THAT ARE SO BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.

 PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE RECOGNISE THE FALSEHOOD OF AGW AND THE HIDDEN AGENDA OF THOSE WHO FORCE THESE LIES DOWN THE LINE.

 LATEST BALI NEWS 

05 December 2007

http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/article.cfm?artId=22401

Taylor said, “The ICSC scientists don’t agree with the pre-determined ‘Bali Mandate’, so instead of discussion and debate, we get censorship. Until the UN rejects the politicization of climate change, their reports, protocols, and mandates aren’t worth reading–much less ratifying.”


 

Terry Dunleavy
Hon. Secretary, New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
http://www.climatescience.org.nz
Email: terry.dunleavy@nzclimatescience.org.nz

_______________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

 

Subject: Artic ice melt caused by wind. NASA


Hi Michael,I read your piece in today’s Mail and that you believe in “climate change” – a euphemism for man-made global warming – because the Arctic ice is melting. No one is saying climate is not changing Michael, it is the cause that is hotly disputed.If you believe Arctic ice melt proves global warming, then you must also believe that the increasing Antarctic ice proves global cooling. Both cannot be true and in fact neither is.NASA  has just released a report referred to in the attachment which says the ice melt is due to unusual winds, not rising Arctic temperatures.

I have previously drawn your attention to the documented piece below on ice loss yet you persist in telling Mail readers that man is causing our planet to melt.
The letter below – written to the British Admiralty is on record; check for yourself and then tell Mail readers what caused the ice loss:
 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”
           
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the Greenland Seas between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of Germany where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the Arctic to investigate the dramatic changes. 

The letter was written, not in the year 2007, but in 1817.

(Ref; Royal Society, London. Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

You disappoint me Michael; you used to be so accurate in your science writings.Yours trulyA D

October 2, 2007

Recent Rapid Decline in Sea Ice caused by Unusual Winds, says NASA

A few of our commentators on this blog found this story earlier today and I thank them.

Anyway, in a news release from NASA Monday, a group of scientists have determined that unusual winds caused the rapid decline (23% loss) in winter perennial ice over the past two years in the northern hemisphere. This drastic reduction is the primary cause of this summer’s fastest-ever sea ice retreat in recorded history which has lead to the smallest extent of total Arctic coverage on record.

According to the NASA study, the perennial ice shrunk by an area the size of Texas and California combined between the winter of 2005 and the winter of 2007. What they found was the Arctic Ocean north of Siberia and Alaska was dominated by thinner seasonal ice that melts faster compared to the thicker ice confined to the Arctic Ocean north of Canada. The thinner ice is more easily compressed and responds more quickly to being pushed out of the Arctic by winds.

“Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” said Son Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and leader of the study. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.

What about these unusual wind patterns. Well, the article does not go into that too much, but I must believe some of this is due to changes in the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) which are large atmospheric circulations which have major impacts on the weather in certain parts of the world.

If you look at the two graphics below, you will notice that both the AO and the NAO have been predominately in the positive phase (red) between 1989-1995 and again from 1999 to current. The positive phase of the (AO) typically leads to milder than normal winters over Scandinavia and Siberia, while colder than normal conditions prevail across Greenland. The positive phase of the NAO again leads to colder conditions over Greenland, while much of the eastern U.S. is warmer than normal in general.

 

 

Categories: Science

Share this:

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/blog/mt-tb.cgi/539

______________________________________________________________

 

 

 

 

Intermittent output of wind farms

http://www.northern-scot.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/3024Northern Scot*Oct 5, 2007
Intermittent output of wind farms

Sir, – Having heard that Olsen Renewables, or -‘Natural Power’ as they like to be called, were organising a “green washing” trip for the local people to the Paul’s Hill wind farm,
I thought I would do a little research.
The 2006 Ofgem data for Paul’s Hill proved to be quite enlightening. Over the 12-month period the output from this wind farm varied between 10.54% and 55.3%, on a month by month basis.
What this really means is that the average output for 2006 was 25.13% of what it should produce if the wind blew at the right speed – every day and all day.
Your readers who still believe in the “Emperor’s Clothes” will be disappointed to learn that none of this extremely intermittent electricity helped to keep their lights on.
Yes, folks, that nasty gas-fired power station at Peterhead (average output of 85%) was the only reason that your 42in-Plasma TV stayed on during the Rangers match.
The climate change story for Paul’s Hill is even more lamentable in that the theoretical reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions was approximately 0.0002%
(figures available for the sceptics).
As usual, I have kept the best part until the end. Combining the Renewable Obligation Certificates earned, and the Climate Change Levy, Paul’s Hill wind farm cost us,
the public, over £7 million for the year 2006.
Elgin’s very own eye-catching Rothes (Cairn Uish) wind farm also cost us about £5.5 million in subsidies for 2006. So, including the cost of the elec-tricity sold,
during 2006 these two wind farms generated approximately £25 million in revenue but didn’t generate any electricity that the grid operators, and hence us, could rely on.

Germany has approximately 20,000 wind turbines, yet they are building 26 new coal-fired power stations. When is Scotland going to learn?
Yours etc,
Bob Graham, Craigsview, Inchberry
 

 

 

 

 ________________________

Red Alert on Greenpeace

Red Alert on Greenpeace

____________________________________

CO2 NOT the cause of temperature rise

The Editor,

Camarthen Journal,

14th September 2007,

 

 

 

 

Dear Editor,

 

 

Gordon James of Friends of the Earth reveals the extent of his climate knowledge when he refers to carbon dioxide (CO2) as: ‘the main climate-changing gas”.

 

Ice core research of the last 420,000 years showed that rises in CO2  followed changes in temperature and therefore could not have caused the rise. The idea that climate is solely driven by CO2 from cars and factories is ludicrous and conveniently ignores the real causes: solar variations, cosmic radiation, orbital changes etc.

 

He cites NASA scientist James Hansen but seems unaware that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, when asked if he was concerned about global warming said: “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with”

 

The recent revelation that NASA has corrected the historical temperature records is of huge importance. It shows the hottest decade in the last one hundred years was the Thirties, not the Nineties as climate alarmists claimed. Another foundation of the scaremongers climate hysteria, the infamous Hockey Stick Chart has also been discredited and quietly dropped by the IPCC.

 

Great news for the tax payer who handed over £21 billion in “climate taxes” in 2005. The climate alarmist’s case is collapsing.

 

Yours faithfully

A D

 

 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 The Times on Thursday: 13th September 2007

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

I was intrigued as I watched ITN’s Mark Austin speak of “Trust in TV” on tonight’s  news.  During last winters ITN campaign to: “raise public awareness” of the mythical “man-made global warming” issue, Mark travelled to Antarctica and visited the Rothera Point research station.   Rothera Base – 67.6 degrees South and just 60 miles inside the Antarctic Circle on the peninsular which juts into the Southern Ocean – is in the 2% of the region which shows warming whilst the interior is cooling and gaining ice. It is one of the warmest stations down there; so comparatively warm in fact that a relative who worked as a meteorologist in the area said they used to refer to the area as: “the banana belt”. 

Further, though it was winter here, what many of the propagandised UK viewers did not realise was that it was high summer down there! Mark showed us melting ice and appeared to suggest that was proof of man-made warming. 

 

Mark speaks of ‘Trust in TV’ having visited one of the warmest stations at the warmest time of year, suggesting that proved the man-made global warming myth.

 
 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 AD

 
 

 

 

Today’s Western Mail – July 31

Floods misery and brain-free decisions

 

 

 

 

SIR – No one can blame the sad victims of flooding for wanting a simple remedy so that it shall never happen again – “Enough” just stop the “climate change” (Brown visits sandbagged electricity station, July 26).

Unfortunately, from time immemorial, natural events have not been so simple to deal with. After the 1947 floods, the Windsor Borough Engineer said “it would take two, or even three, rivers to contain the volume of flood water rushing down the valley after abnormal rain, especially when the land is supersaturated”. He continued, “Catastrophic floods are, and always will be, virtually uncontrollable.”

One thing is clear – we must stop building on flood plains. And yet Housing Minister Yvette Cooper recently insisted it was inevitable that some new homes would be built in such places, telling the Commons, in justification, “the Romans built it [York] on a flood plain”.

The greatest risk to which we are exposed is not “climate change”, but brain-free decisions by politicians.

Dr JOHN ETHERINGTON
Llanhowell, Solva, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire

 

 Freedom of Information request.































Mr Alun James,
Head of Low Carbon Futures
Energy Wales.
Welsh Assembly
Cardiff

30th July 2007. 

Dear Mr James, 

Can you confirm that the Welsh Assembly Government recently hosted an all day seminar at the Metropole Hotel, Llandrindod Wells, for Chief Planning Officers and Chairs of Planning of Unitary Councils in Wales on the subject of Renewable Energy? 

Can you also confirm that a chart purporting to show global temperatures ‘rapidly rising’ from 1850 was presented and offered as “proof” of anthropogenic global warming? Was the chart shown with a view to convince them of the need for wind farms? Can you say why this was done?

 Such a chart can be highly misleading, starting as it did at the time we were emerging from the well-documented Little Ice Age. There were three minima during LIA, the last one in 1850 – no doubt it was pure coincidence that the chart presented began at 1850, the time of one of the coldest periods of the LIA – it may however have given entirely the wrong impression to delegates of climate past and present and that cannot be right or in the public interest.  

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is often presented as being the foremost experts on climate. It may have given a more complete idea of past temperatures had the IPCC chart shown below been used.

Image Hosting
“Compiled by R.S. Bradley and J.A. Eddy. The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.”

 

This clearly reveals that climate has always changed with no help from man; the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Holocene Maximum were all warmer than the present “unprecedented” warming and there have been several known periods when Earth’s climate has warmed by 5 degrees or more in less than 80 years. The slight warming of 0.8 degrees C in the last 100 years, a recovery from the cold of the LIA is therefore not unprecedented and well within natural variations.



























This clearly reveals that climate has always changed with no help from man; the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Holocene Maximum were all warmer than the present “unprecedented” warming and there have been several known periods when Earth’s climate has warmed by 5 degrees or more in less than 80 years. The slight warming of 0.8 degrees C in the last 100 years, a recovery from the cold of the LIA is therefore not unprecedented and well within natural variations.



























 

  

  

 

  

 

 

 

What is generally understood, but rarely publicized (scare stories sell newspapers) is the fact that 97% of all greenhouse gases are natural — mostly water vapour and traces of other gases, which we can do nothing at all about. (Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be at a temperature of minus 18 degrees Celsius.) Of the remaining 3% of greenhouse gases, humans contribute between 0.1 and 0.2% (depending whose numbers you use). If we parked every car in the world tomorrow, the net effect on greenhouse gas levels would be too small to measure. Even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have an undetectable effect on global climate. This has been admitted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (IPCC). However, significant efforts to limit the emission of greenhouse gases in the are currently underway. Why? Tax raising and social change.

The UK Transport Research Laboratory has recently stated, in report 431, page 37,

“Restrictions on cars on air quality grounds have been shown not to be warranted”

It is a fact that central heating boiler flues throw out the same gases as car tail pipes, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, methane, carbon particles etc. Why are they never mentioned if our gas emissions are a problem? Not politically acceptable perhaps? Though it has never been easier to find information, the public don’t check for themselves but simply listen to noisy activists, some of whom are alleged to have infiltrated the ‘green ‘movement for their own purposes, as will be explained later.

 Back in 1988, James Hansen, Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies first postulated the theory that human emissions of CO2 were causing temperatures to rise and suggested, using computer climate models, that this would lead to world drought by the end of the 20th century. Hmmm. Of course, the world took notice and thus began the clamour from ‘environmentalists’ to reduce CO2 emissions and tax the motorist and industry to extinction, even though, just a few years ago, the same people were screaming about global cooling, again, they claimed, caused by motorists and factories.

By 1998, James Hansen had changed his position and said,  “The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change”. He bravely admitted that his predictions had not come true, as he had failed to take account of the huge amounts of CO2 taken up by increased vegetation that thrived on it. Mother Nature maintains a balance and we should trust her more.

Though he still subscribes to the global warming theory – and thousands of scientists disagree with him on that, – on August 15th 2000, the same James Hansen is reported to have said, “Warming over the last century (0.6 degrees C, nearly all of which occurred before 1940) was not caused by carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels”. He now says we should worry about methane from sources such as rice paddy fields and belching cattle. Will the ‘environmentalists’ now seek to ban these? They have been telling us to “plant a tree and save the planet” for the last 30 years but, because the , thanks to its huge forests, is a net CO2 “sink” (that is, the trees soak up more CO2 than the humans emit), the ‘greens’ suddenly don’t like trees.

17,000 scientists, including more than 2,500 climateologists, meteorologists and planetary scientists, have signed a statement initiated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, objecting to the Kyoto Protocol, which says:

 “There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earths atmosphere or disruption of the Earths climate”

Since 1979, measurements taken from the TIROS series of weather satellites, using Microwave Sounding Units together with matching data from radio sonde weather balloons, show 0.05 degrees Centigrade cooling per decade.

“A study, conducted by the Climate Prediction Centre, a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that the continental is not getting hotter. The study presents temperature data showing that the lower 48 states have cooled by one thirtieth of a degree centigrade in the last 25 years.” (The News, May 1 2000) 

  • Dr Sherwood Idso, an expert on high CO2 environments, has pointed out that in the past, our planet has had atmospheric carbon dioxide levels between 10 and 20 times the current level, without spiralling into a greenhouse heat death. Apart from blowing out of the water the ‘greens’ claim that current levels of carbon dioxide are ‘unprecedented’, this also shows that high levels of plant and tree food in our atmosphere are not harmful and that they are naturally cyclic. 
  • Under a leader ‘So much for global warming’ Dr Keith Nicholls of the British Antarctic Survey reports that research at the Filchner-Ronne ridge leads to the conclusion that moderate rises in temperature would lead to thickening of the ice sheet due to changes in sub-surface salt concentrations, and ends by saying “Now it’s clear they [ice shelves] are unaffected”
  • In a letter to ‘Chemistry in ‘ in 1995, Dr John Emsley said: “Like many chemists, I find it hard to accept the global warming theory of IPCC and Greenpeace. The mechanism by which CO2 behaves as a greenhouse gas is not the simplistic one of absorption-emission on which the IPCC bases its hypothesis. I refer to J Barrett’s recent paper on the subject for the correct mechanism (Spectrochimica Acta 1995, 51A, 415). There appears to be little connection between the level of CO2 in the atmosphere and the mean global temperature. Computer predictions which rely on such a connection (to predict global temperature trends) should therefore be treated with scepticism.”

In 1993, it was reported (Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung, 22 May) that Greenpeace had conducted a survey amongst 400 climatologists. Fifty of these were split as to whether mankind’s emissions of greenhouse gases would cause global temperatures to increase or decrease. The other 350 thought the whole theory unsound.

Whilst there is no doubt that many environmentalists are totally sincere and believe what they are told by the IPCC and other groups – without checking the science – some people who are saying that cars cause global warming are ‘greens’ with an agenda of social change, perhaps worse, and meteorologists who are using incomplete computer models to predict the future and ignoring the real measurements mentioned above.

To show that some ‘environmentalists’ seem to have things other than the environment in mind, a founder member of Greenpeace, Canadian, Dr. Patrick Moore, has confirmed that environmental organisations were infiltrated during the 1980’s by activists who sought social change and found ‘the environment’ a convenient vehicle to achieve this. Here are his words;

“Of course, there were always extreme, irrational and mystical elements within our movement, but they tended to be kept in their place during the early years. Then in the mid-Eighties the ultra-leftists and extremists took over. After Greenham Common closed and the Berlin Wall came down these extremists were searching for a new cause and found it in environmentalism. The old agendas of class struggle and anti-corporatism are still there but now they are dressed up in environmental terminology.” Is this the philosophy of Karl Marx? Since these words were published, Dr Moore has been subjected to threats of all kinds from activists, which suggests that his words are true. It would be truly terrible if we unwittingly gave these people tacit support by repeating their propaganda without checking the science.

Here is a telling quote from a astro-physicist that confirms why some scientists say what they do.

“The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity.”

Piers Corbyn – Weather Action, December 2000 bulletin
I trust you have found the above of interest and if you require any further sources of reference, please let me know.
Yours faithfully,
I have appended some quotes from the ‘greenhouse’ industry  and others which may help show what is really occurring. I also enclose comment by others on a recent article in the Guardian on the myth of global warming.

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits….
Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart 1998, ‘s Minister of the Environment
as quoted by the Calgary Herald

To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.” 
(Dr. Stephen Schneider, NCAR, in interview for “Discover” magazine, Oct 1989)

“It’s easier to get funding if you can show some evidence for impending climate disasters.
In the late 1970’s it was the coming ice age.
Who knows what it will be ten years from now.
Sure, science benefits from scary scenarios.”
-Dr Roy Spencer, NASA, 1990 TV Interview

“My suspicion is that, if you have a crisis like this,
it’s easier to gain funds for the profession as a whole”
– Prof Reginald Newell, MIT, 1990

“The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now.” Louis Proyect, Nov. 27, 1997

“I have seen no convincing evidence that any recent sea level changes are caused by human effects or global warming,” Dr. David Aubrey, oceanographer and senior scientist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in

“The trouble with this idea is that planting trees will not lead to the societal changes we want to achieve.” Unidentified delegate, Dec. 5, 1997

AD

 

 

 

 

 

 

Intermittent output of wind farms

http://www.northern-scot.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/3024Northern Scot*Oct 5, 2007
Intermittent output of wind farms

Sir, – Having heard that Olsen Renewables, or -‘Natural Power’ as they like to be called, were organising a “green washing” trip for the local people to the Paul’s Hill wind farm,
I thought I would do a little research.
The 2006 Ofgem data for Paul’s Hill proved to be quite enlightening. Over the 12-month period the output from this wind farm varied between 10.54% and 55.3%, on a month by month basis.
What this really means is that the average output for 2006 was 25.13% of what it should produce if the wind blew at the right speed – every day and all day.
Your readers who still believe in the “Emperor’s Clothes” will be disappointed to learn that none of this extremely intermittent electricity helped to keep their lights on.
Yes, folks, that nasty gas-fired power station at Peterhead (average output of 85%) was the only reason that your 42in-Plasma TV stayed on during the Rangers match.
The climate change story for Paul’s Hill is even more lamentable in that the theoretical reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions was approximately 0.0002%
(figures available for the sceptics).
As usual, I have kept the best part until the end. Combining the Renewable Obligation Certificates earned, and the Climate Change Levy, Paul’s Hill wind farm cost us,
the public, over £7 million for the year 2006.
Elgin’s very own eye-catching Rothes (Cairn Uish) wind farm also cost us about £5.5 million in subsidies for 2006. So, including the cost of the elec-tricity sold,
during 2006 these two wind farms generated approximately £25 million in revenue but didn’t generate any electricity that the grid operators, and hence us, could rely on.

Germany has approximately 20,000 wind turbines, yet they are building 26 new coal-fired power stations. When is Scotland going to learn?
Yours etc,
Bob Graham, Craigsview, Inchberry
 

 

 

 

 ________________________

Red Alert on Greenpeace

Red Alert on Greenpeace

____________________________________

CO2 NOT the cause of temperature rise

The Editor,

 

Camarthen Journal,

14th September 2007,

 

 

 

 

Dear Editor,

 

 

Gordon James of Friends of the Earth reveals the extent of his climate knowledge when he refers to carbon dioxide (CO2) as: ‘the main climate-changing gas”.

 

Ice core research of the last 420,000 years showed that rises in CO2  followed changes in temperature and therefore could not have caused the rise. The idea that climate is solely driven by CO2 from cars and factories is ludicrous and conveniently ignores the real causes: solar variations, cosmic radiation, orbital changes etc.

 

He cites NASA scientist James Hansen but seems unaware that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, when asked if he was concerned about global warming said: “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with”

 

The recent revelation that NASA has corrected the historical temperature records is of huge importance. It shows the hottest decade in the last one hundred years was the Thirties, not the Nineties as climate alarmists claimed. Another foundation of the scaremongers climate hysteria, the infamous Hockey Stick Chart has also been discredited and quietly dropped by the IPCC.

 

Great news for the tax payer who handed over £21 billion in “climate taxes” in 2005. The climate alarmist’s case is collapsing.

 

Yours faithfully

A D

 

 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 The Times on Thursday: 13th September 2007

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gordon James of Friends of the Earth reveals the extent of his climate knowledge when he refers to carbon dioxide (CO2) as: ‘the main climate-changing gas”.

 

Ice core research of the last 420,000 years showed that rises in CO2  followed changes in temperature and therefore could not have caused the rise. The idea that climate is solely driven by CO2 from cars and factories is ludicrous and conveniently ignores the real causes: solar variations, cosmic radiation, orbital changes etc.

 

He cites NASA scientist James Hansen but seems unaware that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, when asked if he was concerned about global warming said: “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with”

 

The recent revelation that NASA has corrected the historical temperature records is of huge importance. It shows the hottest decade in the last one hundred years was the Thirties, not the Nineties as climate alarmists claimed. Another foundation of the scaremongers climate hysteria, the infamous Hockey Stick Chart has also been discredited and quietly dropped by the IPCC.

 

Great news for the tax payer who handed over £21 billion in “climate taxes” in 2005. The climate alarmist’s case is collapsing.

 

Yours faithfully

A D

 

 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 The Times on Thursday: 13th September 2007

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Camarthen Journal,

14th September 2007,

 

 

 

 

Dear Editor,

 

 

Gordon James of Friends of the Earth reveals the extent of his climate knowledge when he refers to carbon dioxide (CO2) as: ‘the main climate-changing gas”.

 

Ice core research of the last 420,000 years showed that rises in CO2  followed changes in temperature and therefore could not have caused the rise. The idea that climate is solely driven by CO2 from cars and factories is ludicrous and conveniently ignores the real causes: solar variations, cosmic radiation, orbital changes etc.

 

He cites NASA scientist James Hansen but seems unaware that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, when asked if he was concerned about global warming said: “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with”

 

The recent revelation that NASA has corrected the historical temperature records is of huge importance. It shows the hottest decade in the last one hundred years was the Thirties, not the Nineties as climate alarmists claimed. Another foundation of the scaremongers climate hysteria, the infamous Hockey Stick Chart has also been discredited and quietly dropped by the IPCC.

 

Great news for the tax payer who handed over £21 billion in “climate taxes” in 2005. The climate alarmist’s case is collapsing.

 

Yours faithfully

A D

 

 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 The Times on Thursday: 13th September 2007

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gordon James of Friends of the Earth reveals the extent of his climate knowledge when he refers to carbon dioxide (CO2) as: ‘the main climate-changing gas”.

 

Ice core research of the last 420,000 years showed that rises in CO2  followed changes in temperature and therefore could not have caused the rise. The idea that climate is solely driven by CO2 from cars and factories is ludicrous and conveniently ignores the real causes: solar variations, cosmic radiation, orbital changes etc.

 

He cites NASA scientist James Hansen but seems unaware that NASA Administrator Michael Griffin, when asked if he was concerned about global warming said: “I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with”

 

The recent revelation that NASA has corrected the historical temperature records is of huge importance. It shows the hottest decade in the last one hundred years was the Thirties, not the Nineties as climate alarmists claimed. Another foundation of the scaremongers climate hysteria, the infamous Hockey Stick Chart has also been discredited and quietly dropped by the IPCC.

 

Great news for the tax payer who handed over £21 billion in “climate taxes” in 2005. The climate alarmist’s case is collapsing.

 

Yours faithfully

A D

 

 

 

 

___________________________________ 

 

 The Times on Thursday: 13th September 2007

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sir, 1816 was the “year without a summer”, thanks to the Tambora eruption that veiled much of the world with dust, screening out the sun. Yet in 1817, while still in the grip of the Little Ice Age, the Royal Society was so worried that 2,000 square leagues of sea ice around Greenland had disappeared within two years, and massive flooding was taking place in Germany, that the President wrote to the Admiralty advising an expedition to find out what was the source of this new heat. Perhaps, when similar things are happening 190 years later, the Royal Society should accept that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is unlikely to be the main, or only, driver of “global warming”.

DR DAVID BELLAMY

Bishop Auckland, Co

DR JOHN ETHERINGTON,

Llanhowell, Pembs

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daily Mail

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Michael ,

I see you are again suggesting in your Mail article today that man is melting the arctic .

 Truth is Michael – and it’s odd so few “science writers” have pointed this out – NASA  has just corrected it’s US historical temperature data which now reveals that the Thirties was the hottest decade in the last 100 years, not the  Nineties as the AGW drum-bangers have screamed for years. Can you say why I have not seen any reference to this huge error by David Derbyshire, the Mail’s science writer?

Activists now say: “Ah, but that’s just the , the rest of the world is still warmer now than then”. Not true. The informed know that was also warmer in the Thirties and Forties than it is now. The “great climatic shake-up” in the ” you refer to is nothing of the sort. It is well within normal fluctuations and has happened many times before as a result of changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation.

To prove the world does not end when the warms a little, note this:

 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”

 
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”

“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”

This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. 

 (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

The letter was written in 1817.

Cheers

A D

Western Mail (Letters) * 28 August 2007

Who says it’s so?

 

 

 

 

SIR – Llywelyn Rhys recites the usual mantra of the British Wind Energy Association: – “Popular surveys continually show large support for wind power” (Letters, August 23).How then does he explain 11,397 objections, with only 59 letters in support, of the huge windfarm proposed on the Isle of Lewis?And, in the Vale of Glamorgan, the Scarweather Sand development drew 3,100 objections with, according to WAG, just nine letters of support.
These are unprecedented numbers of objections to planning applications.
Who is making unsubstantiated claims?David Bellamy (Professor)
Co Durham

__________________________________________________________________________ 

Daily Post Wales

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 14th August 2007.

Dear Editor 

Mark Tami rightly condemns those misguided, misinformed folks who boarded the Airbus wing barge. 

 NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was very recently challenged on the accuracy of its historical temperature record which politicians such as Al Gore used to claim that the Nineties were the hottest decade in the last one hundred years thus: “proving” the man-made climate change myth. 

GISS has corrected its data and lo; we now learn that 1934 was hotter than 1998 and the five hottest years were all before World War 2, not during the Nineties. 

Sadly the UK media seems so cowed by green propaganda, it will take some time for this latest data to reach the British public but at last the myth is falling; slain by the sword of truth.  More on the NASA correction here:  http://www.memeorandum.com/070809/p117#a070809p117 

Yours faithfully

A D

   

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

  

 FTAO Mark Austin for comment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was intrigued as I watched ITN’s Mark Austin speak of “Trust in TV” on tonight’s  news.  During last winters ITN campaign to: “raise public awareness” of the mythical “man-made global warming” issue, Mark travelled to Antarctica and visited the Rothera Point research station.   Rothera Base – 67.6 degrees South and just 60 miles inside the Antarctic Circle on the peninsular which juts into the Southern Ocean – is in the 2% of the region which shows warming whilst the interior is cooling and gaining ice. It is one of the warmest stations down there; so comparatively warm in fact that a relative who worked as a meteorologist in the area said they used to refer to the area as: “the banana belt”. 

Further, though it was winter here, what many of the propagandised UK viewers did not realise was that it was high summer down there! Mark showed us melting ice and appeared to suggest that was proof of man-made warming. 

 

Mark speaks of ‘Trust in TV’ having visited one of the warmest stations at the warmest time of year, suggesting that proved the man-made global warming myth.

 
 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 AD

 
 

 

 

Today’s Western Mail – July 31

Floods misery and brain-free decisions

 

 

 

 

SIR – No one can blame the sad victims of flooding for wanting a simple remedy so that it shall never happen again – “Enough” just stop the “climate change” (Brown visits sandbagged electricity station, July 26).

Unfortunately, from time immemorial, natural events have not been so simple to deal with. After the 1947 floods, the Windsor Borough Engineer said “it would take two, or even three, rivers to contain the volume of flood water rushing down the valley after abnormal rain, especially when the land is supersaturated”. He continued, “Catastrophic floods are, and always will be, virtually uncontrollable.”

One thing is clear – we must stop building on flood plains. And yet Housing Minister Yvette Cooper recently insisted it was inevitable that some new homes would be built in such places, telling the Commons, in justification, “the Romans built it [York] on a flood plain”.

The greatest risk to which we are exposed is not “climate change”, but brain-free decisions by politicians.

Dr JOHN ETHERINGTON
Llanhowell, Solva, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire

 

 Freedom of Information request.































Mr Alun James,
Head of Low Carbon Futures
Energy Wales.
Welsh Assembly
Cardiff

30th July 2007. 

Dear Mr James, 

Can you confirm that the Welsh Assembly Government recently hosted an all day seminar at the Metropole Hotel, Llandrindod Wells, for Chief Planning Officers and Chairs of Planning of Unitary Councils in Wales on the subject of Renewable Energy? 

Can you also confirm that a chart purporting to show global temperatures ‘rapidly rising’ from 1850 was presented and offered as “proof” of anthropogenic global warming? Was the chart shown with a view to convince them of the need for wind farms? Can you say why this was done?

 Such a chart can be highly misleading, starting as it did at the time we were emerging from the well-documented Little Ice Age. There were three minima during LIA, the last one in 1850 – no doubt it was pure coincidence that the chart presented began at 1850, the time of one of the coldest periods of the LIA – it may however have given entirely the wrong impression to delegates of climate past and present and that cannot be right or in the public interest.  

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is often presented as being the foremost experts on climate. It may have given a more complete idea of past temperatures had the IPCC chart shown below been used.

Image Hosting
“Compiled by R.S. Bradley and J.A. Eddy. The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.”

 

This clearly reveals that climate has always changed with no help from man; the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Holocene Maximum were all warmer than the present “unprecedented” warming and there have been several known periods when Earth’s climate has warmed by 5 degrees or more in less than 80 years. The slight warming of 0.8 degrees C in the last 100 years, a recovery from the cold of the LIA is therefore not unprecedented and well within natural variations.



























This clearly reveals that climate has always changed with no help from man; the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Holocene Maximum were all warmer than the present “unprecedented” warming and there have been several known periods when Earth’s climate has warmed by 5 degrees or more in less than 80 years. The slight warming of 0.8 degrees C in the last 100 years, a recovery from the cold of the LIA is therefore not unprecedented and well within natural variations.



























 

  

  

 

  

 

 

 

What is generally understood, but rarely publicized (scare stories sell newspapers) is the fact that 97% of all greenhouse gases are natural — mostly water vapour and traces of other gases, which we can do nothing at all about. (Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be at a temperature of minus 18 degrees Celsius.) Of the remaining 3% of greenhouse gases, humans contribute between 0.1 and 0.2% (depending whose numbers you use). If we parked every car in the world tomorrow, the net effect on greenhouse gas levels would be too small to measure. Even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have an undetectable effect on global climate. This has been admitted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (IPCC). However, significant efforts to limit the emission of greenhouse gases in the are currently underway. Why? Tax raising and social change.

The UK Transport Research Laboratory has recently stated, in report 431, page 37,

“Restrictions on cars on air quality grounds have been shown not to be warranted”

It is a fact that central heating boiler flues throw out the same gases as car tail pipes, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, methane, carbon particles etc. Why are they never mentioned if our gas emissions are a problem? Not politically acceptable perhaps? Though it has never been easier to find information, the public don’t check for themselves but simply listen to noisy activists, some of whom are alleged to have infiltrated the ‘green ‘movement for their own purposes, as will be explained later.

 Back in 1988, James Hansen, Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies first postulated the theory that human emissions of CO2 were causing temperatures to rise and suggested, using computer climate models, that this would lead to world drought by the end of the 20th century. Hmmm. Of course, the world took notice and thus began the clamour from ‘environmentalists’ to reduce CO2 emissions and tax the motorist and industry to extinction, even though, just a few years ago, the same people were screaming about global cooling, again, they claimed, caused by motorists and factories.

By 1998, James Hansen had changed his position and said,  “The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change”. He bravely admitted that his predictions had not come true, as he had failed to take account of the huge amounts of CO2 taken up by increased vegetation that thrived on it. Mother Nature maintains a balance and we should trust her more.

Though he still subscribes to the global warming theory – and thousands of scientists disagree with him on that, – on August 15th 2000, the same James Hansen is reported to have said, “Warming over the last century (0.6 degrees C, nearly all of which occurred before 1940) was not caused by carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels”. He now says we should worry about methane from sources such as rice paddy fields and belching cattle. Will the ‘environmentalists’ now seek to ban these? They have been telling us to “plant a tree and save the planet” for the last 30 years but, because the , thanks to its huge forests, is a net CO2 “sink” (that is, the trees soak up more CO2 than the humans emit), the ‘greens’ suddenly don’t like trees.

17,000 scientists, including more than 2,500 climateologists, meteorologists and planetary scientists, have signed a statement initiated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, objecting to the Kyoto Protocol, which says:

 “There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earths atmosphere or disruption of the Earths climate”

Since 1979, measurements taken from the TIROS series of weather satellites, using Microwave Sounding Units together with matching data from radio sonde weather balloons, show 0.05 degrees Centigrade cooling per decade.

“A study, conducted by the Climate Prediction Centre, a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that the continental is not getting hotter. The study presents temperature data showing that the lower 48 states have cooled by one thirtieth of a degree centigrade in the last 25 years.” (The News, May 1 2000) 

  • Dr Sherwood Idso, an expert on high CO2 environments, has pointed out that in the past, our planet has had atmospheric carbon dioxide levels between 10 and 20 times the current level, without spiralling into a greenhouse heat death. Apart from blowing out of the water the ‘greens’ claim that current levels of carbon dioxide are ‘unprecedented’, this also shows that high levels of plant and tree food in our atmosphere are not harmful and that they are naturally cyclic. 
  • Under a leader ‘So much for global warming’ Dr Keith Nicholls of the British Antarctic Survey reports that research at the Filchner-Ronne ridge leads to the conclusion that moderate rises in temperature would lead to thickening of the ice sheet due to changes in sub-surface salt concentrations, and ends by saying “Now it’s clear they [ice shelves] are unaffected”
  • In a letter to ‘Chemistry in ‘ in 1995, Dr John Emsley said: “Like many chemists, I find it hard to accept the global warming theory of IPCC and Greenpeace. The mechanism by which CO2 behaves as a greenhouse gas is not the simplistic one of absorption-emission on which the IPCC bases its hypothesis. I refer to J Barrett’s recent paper on the subject for the correct mechanism (Spectrochimica Acta 1995, 51A, 415). There appears to be little connection between the level of CO2 in the atmosphere and the mean global temperature. Computer predictions which rely on such a connection (to predict global temperature trends) should therefore be treated with scepticism.”

In 1993, it was reported (Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung, 22 May) that Greenpeace had conducted a survey amongst 400 climatologists. Fifty of these were split as to whether mankind’s emissions of greenhouse gases would cause global temperatures to increase or decrease. The other 350 thought the whole theory unsound.

Whilst there is no doubt that many environmentalists are totally sincere and believe what they are told by the IPCC and other groups – without checking the science – some people who are saying that cars cause global warming are ‘greens’ with an agenda of social change, perhaps worse, and meteorologists who are using incomplete computer models to predict the future and ignoring the real measurements mentioned above.

To show that some ‘environmentalists’ seem to have things other than the environment in mind, a founder member of Greenpeace, Canadian, Dr. Patrick Moore, has confirmed that environmental organisations were infiltrated during the 1980’s by activists who sought social change and found ‘the environment’ a convenient vehicle to achieve this. Here are his words;

“Of course, there were always extreme, irrational and mystical elements within our movement, but they tended to be kept in their place during the early years. Then in the mid-Eighties the ultra-leftists and extremists took over. After Greenham Common closed and the Berlin Wall came down these extremists were searching for a new cause and found it in environmentalism. The old agendas of class struggle and anti-corporatism are still there but now they are dressed up in environmental terminology.” Is this the philosophy of Karl Marx? Since these words were published, Dr Moore has been subjected to threats of all kinds from activists, which suggests that his words are true. It would be truly terrible if we unwittingly gave these people tacit support by repeating their propaganda without checking the science.

Here is a telling quote from a astro-physicist that confirms why some scientists say what they do.

“The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity.”

Piers Corbyn – Weather Action, December 2000 bulletin
I trust you have found the above of interest and if you require any further sources of reference, please let me know.
Yours faithfully,
I have appended some quotes from the ‘greenhouse’ industry  and others which may help show what is really occurring. I also enclose comment by others on a recent article in the Guardian on the myth of global warming.

“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits….
Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart 1998, ‘s Minister of the Environment
as quoted by the Calgary Herald

To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.” 
(Dr. Stephen Schneider, NCAR, in interview for “Discover” magazine, Oct 1989)

“It’s easier to get funding if you can show some evidence for impending climate disasters.
In the late 1970’s it was the coming ice age.
Who knows what it will be ten years from now.
Sure, science benefits from scary scenarios.”
-Dr Roy Spencer, NASA, 1990 TV Interview

“My suspicion is that, if you have a crisis like this,
it’s easier to gain funds for the profession as a whole”
– Prof Reginald Newell, MIT, 1990

“The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now.” Louis Proyect, Nov. 27, 1997

“I have seen no convincing evidence that any recent sea level changes are caused by human effects or global warming,” Dr. David Aubrey, oceanographer and senior scientist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in

“The trouble with this idea is that planting trees will not lead to the societal changes we want to achieve.” Unidentified delegate, Dec. 5, 1997

AD

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject: Artic ice melt caused by wind. NASA


Hi Michael,I read your piece in today’s Mail and that you believe in “climate change” – a euphemism for man-made global warming – because the Arctic ice is melting. No one is saying climate is not changing Michael, it is the cause that is hotly disputed.If you believe Arctic ice melt proves global warming, then you must also believe that the increasing Antarctic ice proves global cooling. Both cannot be true and in fact neither is.NASA  has just released a report referred to in the attachment which says the ice melt is due to unusual winds, not rising Arctic temperatures.

I have previously drawn your attention to the documented piece below on ice loss yet you persist in telling Mail readers that man is causing our planet to melt.
The letter below – written to the British Admiralty is on record; check for yourself and then tell Mail readers what caused the ice loss:
 A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”
           
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the Greenland Seas between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of Germany where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the Arctic to investigate the dramatic changes. 

The letter was written, not in the year 2007, but in 1817.

(Ref; Royal Society, London. Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

You disappoint me Michael; you used to be so accurate in your science writings.Yours trulyA D

October 2, 2007

Recent Rapid Decline in Sea Ice caused by Unusual Winds, says NASA

A few of our commentators on this blog found this story earlier today and I thank them.

Anyway, in a news release from NASA Monday, a group of scientists have determined that unusual winds caused the rapid decline (23% loss) in winter perennial ice over the past two years in the northern hemisphere. This drastic reduction is the primary cause of this summer’s fastest-ever sea ice retreat in recorded history which has lead to the smallest extent of total Arctic coverage on record.

According to the NASA study, the perennial ice shrunk by an area the size of Texas and California combined between the winter of 2005 and the winter of 2007. What they found was the Arctic Ocean north of Siberia and Alaska was dominated by thinner seasonal ice that melts faster compared to the thicker ice confined to the Arctic Ocean north of Canada. The thinner ice is more easily compressed and responds more quickly to being pushed out of the Arctic by winds.

“Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” said Son Nghiem of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and leader of the study. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.

What about these unusual wind patterns. Well, the article does not go into that too much, but I must believe some of this is due to changes in the Arctic Oscillation (AO) and the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) which are large atmospheric circulations which have major impacts on the weather in certain parts of the world.

If you look at the two graphics below, you will notice that both the AO and the NAO have been predominately in the positive phase (red) between 1989-1995 and again from 1999 to current. The positive phase of the (AO) typically leads to milder than normal winters over Scandinavia and Siberia, while colder than normal conditions prevail across Greenland. The positive phase of the NAO again leads to colder conditions over Greenland, while much of the eastern U.S. is warmer than normal in general.

 

 

Categories: Science

Share this:

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/blog/mt-tb.cgi/539

______________________________________________________________

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My FoI request is for a list and contact details of the attendees at the seminar so that they can be shown the above, many other charts and peer reviewed scientific studies of past climate that they might get a more complete picture of the facts. Can you also say who funded the seminar?

 

I have copied this to Welsh Assembly members.

Yours faithfully,

 

AD

 

 No evidence that changing CO2 is a net driver for world climate.

In desperate attempts to shore up their crumbling doctrine of man-made climate change, Professor Lockwood and Henry Davenport (Letters, July 14) themselves cherry-pick data. Prof Lockwood’s “refutation” of the decisive role of solar activity in driving climate is as valid as claiming a particular year was not warm by simply looking at the winter half of data. The most significant and persistent cycle of variation in the world’s temperature follows the 22-year magnetic cycle of the sun’s activity. So what does he do? He “finds” that for an 11-year stretch around 1987 to 1998 world temperatures rose, while there was a fall in his preferred measures of solar activity. A 22-year cycle and an 11-year cycle will of necessity move in opposite directions half the time.
The problem for global warmers is that there is no evidence that changing CO2 is a net driver for world climate. Feedback processes negate its potential warming effects. Their theory has no power to predict. It is faith, not science. I challenge them to issue a forecast to compete with our severe weather warnings – made months ago – for this month and August which are based on predictions of solar-particle and magnetic effects that there will be periods of major thunderstorms, hail and further flooding in Britain, most notably July 22-26, August 5-9 and August 18-23. These periods will be associated with new activity on the sun and tropical storms. We also forecast that British and world temperatures will continue to decline this year and in 2008. What do the global warmers forecast?


Piers Corbyn
Weather Action

 

 

 

 

The Editor,

Daily Post Wales

25th July 2007

Dear Editor,

As expected, climate alarmists have leaped upon recent flooding as “proof” of man-made global warming. Just twelve months ago they told us we should buy drought-resistant plants as future summers in UK would be hotter and drier than ever before. They claim to have warned us for decades that man is destroying the planet but then the scare was global cooling! They have a 100 % record. Wrong every time!
Far more serious flooding occurred in 1912 when it rained all summer and 7 inches of rain fell in one day in Norfolk; Dorset saw 11 inches fall one day in 1955 and London, June 1903 saw rain for 58 hours non-stop.
Week after week politicians and environmental lobby groups (ELG’s) are telling us we need to take ‘firm action’ to stop climate change. That’s code for huge restrictions on our freedom to travel and further massive tax rises to ‘save the planet’.
China has just overtaken the US in carbon dioxide emissions but ELG’s don’t mention that. The real target of their campaigns to dangerously restrict energy use and impose controls on our way of life is Western industrial nations. Us!
The public are being duped but a recent survey revealed that 56% believed the global warming scare was being used to raise revenues. Thankfully the myth is gradually being shattered.
AD

 Letter to The Right Reverend John S. Davies,

5th January 2001
The Right Reverend John S. Davies,
Lord Bishop of St. Asaph,
My Lord Bishop,

I was troubled to read, in Teulu Asaph and several other publications, of your concerns about global warming and, most especially, that you feel our car exhausts will lead to the destruction of islands on the other side of the world. You are obviously sincerely worried and I have spent some time gathering the following information to hopefully help ease your mind. I trust you will read it with interest and relief. I apologise for the extent of my writings but there is so much evidence available, it is difficult to know how much to include.

 

The words, “if the weight of scientific opinion is now pointing to a correlation between the production of greenhouse gases and climate change” are very important, as you will see later. In fact, the weight of evidence is that climate change is perfectly normal as the Earth moves from Ice Age to warm and back to Ice age, the well known Milankovitch cycles. The earth was 3 degrees warmer than it is now during the Medieval Optimum, a period from 900 to 1200 A.D, and the statements by some that the 1990s were the hottest decade in last 1000 years are simply not true.

 

If the Church is going to enter the ‘global warming’ arena, I feel it is vital that what all scientists are saying is considered, rather than just the dwindling band who insist on ignoring real data and basing their predictions on General Circulation Models (GCM’s) in computers. These models are still not even able to predict the weather in five days time and yet some ‘green’ activists are using them to demand catastrophic changes in our society, including factory closures, power supply reductions and worse to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) which, as will be seen later, are but a tiny part of the vital ‘greenhouse’ effect. Nature circulates 200 billion tonnes of CO2 as part of the carbon cycle.

 

You suggest that recent rains are caused by pollution; may I respectfully draw your attention to a report in the Daily Telegraph 26th November 2000.

Britain’s flooding ‘not caused by global warming’, say scientists
By Robert Matthews

Claims by Government ministers and the media that ’s recent spate of bad weather is caused by global warming will be dismissed as scientific nonsense this week by leading climate experts.

 

An international conference of experts on the European climate will be told that the heavy rainfall and flooding of recent months is entirely consistent with a well-known weather system, and shows no sign of being linked to ‘global warming’. The rebuttal comes as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, returns from negotiations in aimed at cutting greenhouse gas levels and reducing global warming. According to environmentalists, global warming is to blame for the stormy weather and floods of recent months.

It is a claim which Government ministers have repeatedly endorsed, with Mr Prescott claiming that ‘s recent flooding were “a wake-up call” on global warming. Yet climate experts will reveal this week that the most likely cause is the so-called North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a pattern of atmospheric pressure which forms over the ocean.

Discovered by meteorologists long before the idea of global warming became fashionable, the NAO is known to play a key role in determining the weather experienced across the Continent.

According to Dr Stephenson, one of the organisers of this week’s conference, being held in , Government insistence that the floods are due to global warming are not based on solid science. Records dating back to the mid-1800s show that the NAO has flipped between its two states more or less at random – with no signs at all of permanent change.

Dr Stephenson said: “I am not convinced that the Government can attribute these events to global warming. They have jumped on the global warming bandwagon because it’s easier to do that than take action on things like protecting infrastructure.”
Fresh evidence contradicting the supposed link between global warming and the recent floods will also be revealed at the NAO conference by scientists from the universities of and .
By studying stalagmite growth, the team has built a record of rainfall dating back to the Norman Conquest – the biggest archive ever assembled. According to Dr Andy Baker of the , this record confirms that the recent bad weather is far from exceptional, and shows no signs of getting worse. Dr Baker said: “We have shown that nature is able to repeat current events without the help of global warming. Politicians and other decision-makers should be aware of natural rainfall variability.”
You will be relieved to know that the statement, “exhaust gases from our cars will contribute to the raising of sea levels and the destruction of small islands on the other side of the world” is not supported by scientific evidence. I presume you are referring to the Pacific Duke of and perhaps these reports will allay your concerns. First, the newspaper ‘The Independent’ reported:
1000 flee as sea begins to swallow up Pacific islands.
   As the world’s wealthiest nations bickered about carbon dioxide credits in last weekend, the inhabitants of a remote group of coral atolls on the other side of the planet were watching the advance inexorably towards their homes. … The islands, together with neighbouring atolls such as Takuu, home to a small community of “singing” Polynesians, are likely to be the first to be engulfed by the effects of global warming”
  
   The story is invalidated by Pacnews, as well as the LA Times which reported on November 11th as follows:
Sinking .
“A group of islands near is sinking into the Pacific
at the rate of 4 to 6 inches a year, and a team of government scientists has recommended that their 20,000 residents be quickly relocated to a larger island. The Duke of York Islands are sinking, not because of rising sea levels, but because of seismic activity. In 1994, two volcanoes on opposite sides of one of the islands erupted for four months. When the activity ceased, evacuees moved back, but the regional news service Pacnews now reports that further subsidence is forcing officials to move the inhabitants to the on . Many buildings on the islands are already under water.”
Situated at the south-western end of the Pacific “Ring of Fire”, a volcanic region, these islands are not geologically stable and certainly do not make suitable platforms from which to measure mean sea level. Australia is geologically stable, has a huge Pacific shore and, according to National Tidal Facility data, struggles to find sea level change in the order of one-half of one inch per century. The tide gauge, further to the east, displays no trend. A report on another island group reads as follows:
THE 11,000 inhabitants of a tiny Pacific country that was predicted to vanish under water because of the effects of “global warming” have been given a reprieve because sea levels have begun to fall.
In 1991, (see graph below) scientists forecast that the coral atoll of nine islands – which is only 12ft above sea level at its highest point – would vanish within decades because the sea was rising by up to 1.5in a year. However, a new study has found that sea levels have since fallen by nearly 2.5in and experts at Tuvalu’s Meteorological Service in Funafuti, the islands’ administrative centre, said this meant they would survive for at least another 100 years.
They said similar sea level falls had been recorded in and the , which were also considered to be under threat. The release of the data from , formerly part of the Gilbert and , will renew scientific debate about climate change and its impact on ocean levels. The island’s scientists admitted they were surprised and “a little embarrassed” by the change, which they blame on unusual weather conditions caused by El Niño in 1997.
The following information is from John L. Daly in : This is the monthly record of sea level at Funafuti Atoll, (data from the Permanent Service for level)

click on image to enlargeImage Hosting at ImageHosting.comSea level does fluctuate but, as we can see, `sea level rise’ in is a complete sham. Sea level since 1978 has been averaging around 7,000 millimetres, with brief falls in 1983, 1992 and 1998 due to El Niño events. The data for 1999/2000 is not shown, but the latest reports suggest it has fallen again, without even an El Niño to force it down. nations appear in no danger from rising sea level for the foreseeable future.Polly Toynbee of the Guardian recently wrote that meteorologists had revised their warming predictions to 6 degrees. I wonder where she gets this information? According to what I have read, each time meteorologists improve their GCM’s they revise predicted warming downwards. Ecology writer Zac Goldsmith, writing recently on global warming in the Mail on Sunday said; “open stretches of water have been sighted at the North Pole for the first time in human history”. Really? I have seen a photograph taken on the 18th May 1987, which shows three submarines, USS Billfish, USS Seadevil and HMS Superb, floating in open water at the North Pole. The photograph is signed by the three submarine commanders. These stretches of open water occur regularly during the Arctic summer; the Russian name for them is “polyinas”Here is a letter written to the British Admiralty. A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”   
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. The letter was written, not in the year 2000, but in 1817. (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

   

 

5th January 2001
The Right Reverend John S. Davies,
Lord Bishop of St. Asaph,
My Lord Bishop,

I was troubled to read, in Teulu Asaph and several other publications, of your concerns about global warming and, most especially, that you feel our car exhausts will lead to the destruction of islands on the other side of the world. You are obviously sincerely worried and I have spent some time gathering the following information to hopefully help ease your mind. I trust you will read it with interest and relief. I apologise for the extent of my writings but there is so much evidence available, it is difficult to know how much to include.

 

The words, “if the weight of scientific opinion is now pointing to a correlation between the production of greenhouse gases and climate change” are very important, as you will see later. In fact, the weight of evidence is that climate change is perfectly normal as the Earth moves from Ice Age to warm and back to Ice age, the well known Milankovitch cycles. The earth was 3 degrees warmer than it is now during the Medieval Optimum, a period from 900 to 1200 A.D, and the statements by some that the 1990s were the hottest decade in last 1000 years are simply not true.

 

If the Church is going to enter the ‘global warming’ arena, I feel it is vital that what all scientists are saying is considered, rather than just the dwindling band who insist on ignoring real data and basing their predictions on General Circulation Models (GCM’s) in computers. These models are still not even able to predict the weather in five days time and yet some ‘green’ activists are using them to demand catastrophic changes in our society, including factory closures, power supply reductions and worse to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) which, as will be seen later, are but a tiny part of the vital ‘greenhouse’ effect. Nature circulates 200 billion tonnes of CO2 as part of the carbon cycle.

 

You suggest that recent rains are caused by pollution; may I respectfully draw your attention to a report in the Daily Telegraph 26th November 2000.

Britain’s flooding ‘not caused by global warming’, say scientists
By Robert Matthews

Claims by Government ministers and the media that ’s recent spate of bad weather is caused by global warming will be dismissed as scientific nonsense this week by leading climate experts.

 

An international conference of experts on the European climate will be told that the heavy rainfall and flooding of recent months is entirely consistent with a well-known weather system, and shows no sign of being linked to ‘global warming’. The rebuttal comes as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, returns from negotiations in aimed at cutting greenhouse gas levels and reducing global warming. According to environmentalists, global warming is to blame for the stormy weather and floods of recent months.

It is a claim which Government ministers have repeatedly endorsed, with Mr Prescott claiming that ‘s recent flooding were “a wake-up call” on global warming. Yet climate experts will reveal this week that the most likely cause is the so-called North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a pattern of atmospheric pressure which forms over the ocean.

Discovered by meteorologists long before the idea of global warming became fashionable, the NAO is known to play a key role in determining the weather experienced across the Continent.

According to Dr Stephenson, one of the organisers of this week’s conference, being held in , Government insistence that the floods are due to global warming are not based on solid science. Records dating back to the mid-1800s show that the NAO has flipped between its two states more or less at random – with no signs at all of permanent change.

Dr Stephenson said: “I am not convinced that the Government can attribute these events to global warming. They have jumped on the global warming bandwagon because it’s easier to do that than take action on things like protecting infrastructure.”
Fresh evidence contradicting the supposed link between global warming and the recent floods will also be revealed at the NAO conference by scientists from the universities of and .
By studying stalagmite growth, the team has built a record of rainfall dating back to the Norman Conquest – the biggest archive ever assembled. According to Dr Andy Baker of the , this record confirms that the recent bad weather is far from exceptional, and shows no signs of getting worse. Dr Baker said: “We have shown that nature is able to repeat current events without the help of global warming. Politicians and other decision-makers should be aware of natural rainfall variability.”
You will be relieved to know that the statement, “exhaust gases from our cars will contribute to the raising of sea levels and the destruction of small islands on the other side of the world” is not supported by scientific evidence. I presume you are referring to the Pacific Duke of and perhaps these reports will allay your concerns. First, the newspaper ‘The Independent’ reported:
1000 flee as sea begins to swallow up Pacific islands.
   As the world’s wealthiest nations bickered about carbon dioxide credits in last weekend, the inhabitants of a remote group of coral atolls on the other side of the planet were watching the advance inexorably towards their homes. … The islands, together with neighbouring atolls such as Takuu, home to a small community of “singing” Polynesians, are likely to be the first to be engulfed by the effects of global warming”
  
   The story is invalidated by Pacnews, as well as the LA Times which reported on November 11th as follows:
Sinking .
“A group of islands near is sinking into the Pacific
at the rate of 4 to 6 inches a year, and a team of government scientists has recommended that their 20,000 residents be quickly relocated to a larger island. The Duke of York Islands are sinking, not because of rising sea levels, but because of seismic activity. In 1994, two volcanoes on opposite sides of one of the islands erupted for four months. When the activity ceased, evacuees moved back, but the regional news service Pacnews now reports that further subsidence is forcing officials to move the inhabitants to the on . Many buildings on the islands are already under water.”
Situated at the south-western end of the Pacific “Ring of Fire”, a volcanic region, these islands are not geologically stable and certainly do not make suitable platforms from which to measure mean sea level. Australia is geologically stable, has a huge Pacific shore and, according to National Tidal Facility data, struggles to find sea level change in the order of one-half of one inch per century. The tide gauge, further to the east, displays no trend. A report on another island group reads as follows:
THE 11,000 inhabitants of a tiny Pacific country that was predicted to vanish under water because of the effects of “global warming” have been given a reprieve because sea levels have begun to fall.
In 1991, (see graph below) scientists forecast that the coral atoll of nine islands – which is only 12ft above sea level at its highest point – would vanish within decades because the sea was rising by up to 1.5in a year. However, a new study has found that sea levels have since fallen by nearly 2.5in and experts at Tuvalu’s Meteorological Service in Funafuti, the islands’ administrative centre, said this meant they would survive for at least another 100 years.
They said similar sea level falls had been recorded in and the , which were also considered to be under threat. The release of the data from , formerly part of the Gilbert and , will renew scientific debate about climate change and its impact on ocean levels. The island’s scientists admitted they were surprised and “a little embarrassed” by the change, which they blame on unusual weather conditions caused by El Niño in 1997.
The following information is from John L. Daly in : This is the monthly record of sea level at Funafuti Atoll, (data from the Permanent Service for level)

click on image to enlargeImage Hosting at ImageHosting.comSea level does fluctuate but, as we can see, `sea level rise’ in is a complete sham. Sea level since 1978 has been averaging around 7,000 millimetres, with brief falls in 1983, 1992 and 1998 due to El Niño events. The data for 1999/2000 is not shown, but the latest reports suggest it has fallen again, without even an El Niño to force it down. nations appear in no danger from rising sea level for the foreseeable future.Polly Toynbee of the Guardian recently wrote that meteorologists had revised their warming predictions to 6 degrees. I wonder where she gets this information? According to what I have read, each time meteorologists improve their GCM’s they revise predicted warming downwards. Ecology writer Zac Goldsmith, writing recently on global warming in the Mail on Sunday said; “open stretches of water have been sighted at the North Pole for the first time in human history”. Really? I have seen a photograph taken on the 18th May 1987, which shows three submarines, USS Billfish, USS Seadevil and HMS Superb, floating in open water at the North Pole. The photograph is signed by the three submarine commanders. These stretches of open water occur regularly during the Arctic summer; the Russian name for them is “polyinas”Here is a letter written to the British Admiralty. A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”   
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. The letter was written, not in the year 2000, but in 1817. (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

   

 

 

My FoI request is for a list and contact details of the attendees at the seminar so that they can be shown the above, many other charts and peer reviewed scientific studies of past climate that they might get a more complete picture of the facts. Can you also say who funded the seminar?

 

I have copied this to Welsh Assembly members.

Yours faithfully,

 

AD

 

 No evidence that changing CO2 is a net driver for world climate.

In desperate attempts to shore up their crumbling doctrine of man-made climate change, Professor Lockwood and Henry Davenport (Letters, July 14) themselves cherry-pick data. Prof Lockwood’s “refutation” of the decisive role of solar activity in driving climate is as valid as claiming a particular year was not warm by simply looking at the winter half of data. The most significant and persistent cycle of variation in the world’s temperature follows the 22-year magnetic cycle of the sun’s activity. So what does he do? He “finds” that for an 11-year stretch around 1987 to 1998 world temperatures rose, while there was a fall in his preferred measures of solar activity. A 22-year cycle and an 11-year cycle will of necessity move in opposite directions half the time.
The problem for global warmers is that there is no evidence that changing CO2 is a net driver for world climate. Feedback processes negate its potential warming effects. Their theory has no power to predict. It is faith, not science. I challenge them to issue a forecast to compete with our severe weather warnings – made months ago – for this month and August which are based on predictions of solar-particle and magnetic effects that there will be periods of major thunderstorms, hail and further flooding in Britain, most notably July 22-26, August 5-9 and August 18-23. These periods will be associated with new activity on the sun and tropical storms. We also forecast that British and world temperatures will continue to decline this year and in 2008. What do the global warmers forecast?


Piers Corbyn
Weather Action

 

 

 

 

The Editor,

Daily Post Wales

25th July 2007

Dear Editor,

As expected, climate alarmists have leaped upon recent flooding as “proof” of man-made global warming. Just twelve months ago they told us we should buy drought-resistant plants as future summers in UK would be hotter and drier than ever before. They claim to have warned us for decades that man is destroying the planet but then the scare was global cooling! They have a 100 % record. Wrong every time!
Far more serious flooding occurred in 1912 when it rained all summer and 7 inches of rain fell in one day in Norfolk; Dorset saw 11 inches fall one day in 1955 and London, June 1903 saw rain for 58 hours non-stop.
Week after week politicians and environmental lobby groups (ELG’s) are telling us we need to take ‘firm action’ to stop climate change. That’s code for huge restrictions on our freedom to travel and further massive tax rises to ‘save the planet’.
China has just overtaken the US in carbon dioxide emissions but ELG’s don’t mention that. The real target of their campaigns to dangerously restrict energy use and impose controls on our way of life is Western industrial nations. Us!
The public are being duped but a recent survey revealed that 56% believed the global warming scare was being used to raise revenues. Thankfully the myth is gradually being shattered.
AD

 Letter to The Right Reverend John S. Davies,

5th January 2001
The Right Reverend John S. Davies,
Lord Bishop of St. Asaph,
My Lord Bishop,

I was troubled to read, in Teulu Asaph and several other publications, of your concerns about global warming and, most especially, that you feel our car exhausts will lead to the destruction of islands on the other side of the world. You are obviously sincerely worried and I have spent some time gathering the following information to hopefully help ease your mind. I trust you will read it with interest and relief. I apologise for the extent of my writings but there is so much evidence available, it is difficult to know how much to include.

 

The words, “if the weight of scientific opinion is now pointing to a correlation between the production of greenhouse gases and climate change” are very important, as you will see later. In fact, the weight of evidence is that climate change is perfectly normal as the Earth moves from Ice Age to warm and back to Ice age, the well known Milankovitch cycles. The earth was 3 degrees warmer than it is now during the Medieval Optimum, a period from 900 to 1200 A.D, and the statements by some that the 1990s were the hottest decade in last 1000 years are simply not true.

 

If the Church is going to enter the ‘global warming’ arena, I feel it is vital that what all scientists are saying is considered, rather than just the dwindling band who insist on ignoring real data and basing their predictions on General Circulation Models (GCM’s) in computers. These models are still not even able to predict the weather in five days time and yet some ‘green’ activists are using them to demand catastrophic changes in our society, including factory closures, power supply reductions and worse to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) which, as will be seen later, are but a tiny part of the vital ‘greenhouse’ effect. Nature circulates 200 billion tonnes of CO2 as part of the carbon cycle.

 

You suggest that recent rains are caused by pollution; may I respectfully draw your attention to a report in the Daily Telegraph 26th November 2000.

Britain’s flooding ‘not caused by global warming’, say scientists
By Robert Matthews

Claims by Government ministers and the media that ’s recent spate of bad weather is caused by global warming will be dismissed as scientific nonsense this week by leading climate experts.

 

An international conference of experts on the European climate will be told that the heavy rainfall and flooding of recent months is entirely consistent with a well-known weather system, and shows no sign of being linked to ‘global warming’. The rebuttal comes as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, returns from negotiations in aimed at cutting greenhouse gas levels and reducing global warming. According to environmentalists, global warming is to blame for the stormy weather and floods of recent months.

It is a claim which Government ministers have repeatedly endorsed, with Mr Prescott claiming that ‘s recent flooding were “a wake-up call” on global warming. Yet climate experts will reveal this week that the most likely cause is the so-called North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a pattern of atmospheric pressure which forms over the ocean.

Discovered by meteorologists long before the idea of global warming became fashionable, the NAO is known to play a key role in determining the weather experienced across the Continent.

According to Dr Stephenson, one of the organisers of this week’s conference, being held in , Government insistence that the floods are due to global warming are not based on solid science. Records dating back to the mid-1800s show that the NAO has flipped between its two states more or less at random – with no signs at all of permanent change.

Dr Stephenson said: “I am not convinced that the Government can attribute these events to global warming. They have jumped on the global warming bandwagon because it’s easier to do that than take action on things like protecting infrastructure.”
Fresh evidence contradicting the supposed link between global warming and the recent floods will also be revealed at the NAO conference by scientists from the universities of and .
By studying stalagmite growth, the team has built a record of rainfall dating back to the Norman Conquest – the biggest archive ever assembled. According to Dr Andy Baker of the , this record confirms that the recent bad weather is far from exceptional, and shows no signs of getting worse. Dr Baker said: “We have shown that nature is able to repeat current events without the help of global warming. Politicians and other decision-makers should be aware of natural rainfall variability.”
You will be relieved to know that the statement, “exhaust gases from our cars will contribute to the raising of sea levels and the destruction of small islands on the other side of the world” is not supported by scientific evidence. I presume you are referring to the Pacific Duke of and perhaps these reports will allay your concerns. First, the newspaper ‘The Independent’ reported:
1000 flee as sea begins to swallow up Pacific islands.
   As the world’s wealthiest nations bickered about carbon dioxide credits in last weekend, the inhabitants of a remote group of coral atolls on the other side of the planet were watching the advance inexorably towards their homes. … The islands, together with neighbouring atolls such as Takuu, home to a small community of “singing” Polynesians, are likely to be the first to be engulfed by the effects of global warming”
  
   The story is invalidated by Pacnews, as well as the LA Times which reported on November 11th as follows:
Sinking .
“A group of islands near is sinking into the Pacific
at the rate of 4 to 6 inches a year, and a team of government scientists has recommended that their 20,000 residents be quickly relocated to a larger island. The Duke of York Islands are sinking, not because of rising sea levels, but because of seismic activity. In 1994, two volcanoes on opposite sides of one of the islands erupted for four months. When the activity ceased, evacuees moved back, but the regional news service Pacnews now reports that further subsidence is forcing officials to move the inhabitants to the on . Many buildings on the islands are already under water.”
Situated at the south-western end of the Pacific “Ring of Fire”, a volcanic region, these islands are not geologically stable and certainly do not make suitable platforms from which to measure mean sea level. Australia is geologically stable, has a huge Pacific shore and, according to National Tidal Facility data, struggles to find sea level change in the order of one-half of one inch per century. The tide gauge, further to the east, displays no trend. A report on another island group reads as follows:
THE 11,000 inhabitants of a tiny Pacific country that was predicted to vanish under water because of the effects of “global warming” have been given a reprieve because sea levels have begun to fall.
In 1991, (see graph below) scientists forecast that the coral atoll of nine islands – which is only 12ft above sea level at its highest point – would vanish within decades because the sea was rising by up to 1.5in a year. However, a new study has found that sea levels have since fallen by nearly 2.5in and experts at Tuvalu’s Meteorological Service in Funafuti, the islands’ administrative centre, said this meant they would survive for at least another 100 years.
They said similar sea level falls had been recorded in and the , which were also considered to be under threat. The release of the data from , formerly part of the Gilbert and , will renew scientific debate about climate change and its impact on ocean levels. The island’s scientists admitted they were surprised and “a little embarrassed” by the change, which they blame on unusual weather conditions caused by El Niño in 1997.
The following information is from John L. Daly in : This is the monthly record of sea level at Funafuti Atoll, (data from the Permanent Service for level)

click on image to enlargeImage Hosting at ImageHosting.comSea level does fluctuate but, as we can see, `sea level rise’ in is a complete sham. Sea level since 1978 has been averaging around 7,000 millimetres, with brief falls in 1983, 1992 and 1998 due to El Niño events. The data for 1999/2000 is not shown, but the latest reports suggest it has fallen again, without even an El Niño to force it down. nations appear in no danger from rising sea level for the foreseeable future.Polly Toynbee of the Guardian recently wrote that meteorologists had revised their warming predictions to 6 degrees. I wonder where she gets this information? According to what I have read, each time meteorologists improve their GCM’s they revise predicted warming downwards. Ecology writer Zac Goldsmith, writing recently on global warming in the Mail on Sunday said; “open stretches of water have been sighted at the North Pole for the first time in human history”. Really? I have seen a photograph taken on the 18th May 1987, which shows three submarines, USS Billfish, USS Seadevil and HMS Superb, floating in open water at the North Pole. The photograph is signed by the three submarine commanders. These stretches of open water occur regularly during the Arctic summer; the Russian name for them is “polyinas”Here is a letter written to the British Admiralty. A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”   
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. The letter was written, not in the year 2000, but in 1817. (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

   

 

5th January 2001
The Right Reverend John S. Davies,
Lord Bishop of St. Asaph,
My Lord Bishop,

I was troubled to read, in Teulu Asaph and several other publications, of your concerns about global warming and, most especially, that you feel our car exhausts will lead to the destruction of islands on the other side of the world. You are obviously sincerely worried and I have spent some time gathering the following information to hopefully help ease your mind. I trust you will read it with interest and relief. I apologise for the extent of my writings but there is so much evidence available, it is difficult to know how much to include.

 

The words, “if the weight of scientific opinion is now pointing to a correlation between the production of greenhouse gases and climate change” are very important, as you will see later. In fact, the weight of evidence is that climate change is perfectly normal as the Earth moves from Ice Age to warm and back to Ice age, the well known Milankovitch cycles. The earth was 3 degrees warmer than it is now during the Medieval Optimum, a period from 900 to 1200 A.D, and the statements by some that the 1990s were the hottest decade in last 1000 years are simply not true.

 

If the Church is going to enter the ‘global warming’ arena, I feel it is vital that what all scientists are saying is considered, rather than just the dwindling band who insist on ignoring real data and basing their predictions on General Circulation Models (GCM’s) in computers. These models are still not even able to predict the weather in five days time and yet some ‘green’ activists are using them to demand catastrophic changes in our society, including factory closures, power supply reductions and worse to reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) which, as will be seen later, are but a tiny part of the vital ‘greenhouse’ effect. Nature circulates 200 billion tonnes of CO2 as part of the carbon cycle.

 

You suggest that recent rains are caused by pollution; may I respectfully draw your attention to a report in the Daily Telegraph 26th November 2000.

Britain’s flooding ‘not caused by global warming’, say scientists
By Robert Matthews

Claims by Government ministers and the media that ’s recent spate of bad weather is caused by global warming will be dismissed as scientific nonsense this week by leading climate experts.

 

An international conference of experts on the European climate will be told that the heavy rainfall and flooding of recent months is entirely consistent with a well-known weather system, and shows no sign of being linked to ‘global warming’. The rebuttal comes as John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, returns from negotiations in aimed at cutting greenhouse gas levels and reducing global warming. According to environmentalists, global warming is to blame for the stormy weather and floods of recent months.

It is a claim which Government ministers have repeatedly endorsed, with Mr Prescott claiming that ‘s recent flooding were “a wake-up call” on global warming. Yet climate experts will reveal this week that the most likely cause is the so-called North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a pattern of atmospheric pressure which forms over the ocean.

Discovered by meteorologists long before the idea of global warming became fashionable, the NAO is known to play a key role in determining the weather experienced across the Continent.

According to Dr Stephenson, one of the organisers of this week’s conference, being held in , Government insistence that the floods are due to global warming are not based on solid science. Records dating back to the mid-1800s show that the NAO has flipped between its two states more or less at random – with no signs at all of permanent change.

Dr Stephenson said: “I am not convinced that the Government can attribute these events to global warming. They have jumped on the global warming bandwagon because it’s easier to do that than take action on things like protecting infrastructure.”
Fresh evidence contradicting the supposed link between global warming and the recent floods will also be revealed at the NAO conference by scientists from the universities of and .
By studying stalagmite growth, the team has built a record of rainfall dating back to the Norman Conquest – the biggest archive ever assembled. According to Dr Andy Baker of the , this record confirms that the recent bad weather is far from exceptional, and shows no signs of getting worse. Dr Baker said: “We have shown that nature is able to repeat current events without the help of global warming. Politicians and other decision-makers should be aware of natural rainfall variability.”
You will be relieved to know that the statement, “exhaust gases from our cars will contribute to the raising of sea levels and the destruction of small islands on the other side of the world” is not supported by scientific evidence. I presume you are referring to the Pacific Duke of and perhaps these reports will allay your concerns. First, the newspaper ‘The Independent’ reported:
1000 flee as sea begins to swallow up Pacific islands.
   As the world’s wealthiest nations bickered about carbon dioxide credits in last weekend, the inhabitants of a remote group of coral atolls on the other side of the planet were watching the advance inexorably towards their homes. … The islands, together with neighbouring atolls such as Takuu, home to a small community of “singing” Polynesians, are likely to be the first to be engulfed by the effects of global warming”
  
   The story is invalidated by Pacnews, as well as the LA Times which reported on November 11th as follows:
Sinking .
“A group of islands near is sinking into the Pacific
at the rate of 4 to 6 inches a year, and a team of government scientists has recommended that their 20,000 residents be quickly relocated to a larger island. The Duke of York Islands are sinking, not because of rising sea levels, but because of seismic activity. In 1994, two volcanoes on opposite sides of one of the islands erupted for four months. When the activity ceased, evacuees moved back, but the regional news service Pacnews now reports that further subsidence is forcing officials to move the inhabitants to the on . Many buildings on the islands are already under water.”
Situated at the south-western end of the Pacific “Ring of Fire”, a volcanic region, these islands are not geologically stable and certainly do not make suitable platforms from which to measure mean sea level. Australia is geologically stable, has a huge Pacific shore and, according to National Tidal Facility data, struggles to find sea level change in the order of one-half of one inch per century. The tide gauge, further to the east, displays no trend. A report on another island group reads as follows:
THE 11,000 inhabitants of a tiny Pacific country that was predicted to vanish under water because of the effects of “global warming” have been given a reprieve because sea levels have begun to fall.
In 1991, (see graph below) scientists forecast that the coral atoll of nine islands – which is only 12ft above sea level at its highest point – would vanish within decades because the sea was rising by up to 1.5in a year. However, a new study has found that sea levels have since fallen by nearly 2.5in and experts at Tuvalu’s Meteorological Service in Funafuti, the islands’ administrative centre, said this meant they would survive for at least another 100 years.
They said similar sea level falls had been recorded in and the , which were also considered to be under threat. The release of the data from , formerly part of the Gilbert and , will renew scientific debate about climate change and its impact on ocean levels. The island’s scientists admitted they were surprised and “a little embarrassed” by the change, which they blame on unusual weather conditions caused by El Niño in 1997.
The following information is from John L. Daly in : This is the monthly record of sea level at Funafuti Atoll, (data from the Permanent Service for level)

click on image to enlargeImage Hosting at ImageHosting.comSea level does fluctuate but, as we can see, `sea level rise’ in is a complete sham. Sea level since 1978 has been averaging around 7,000 millimetres, with brief falls in 1983, 1992 and 1998 due to El Niño events. The data for 1999/2000 is not shown, but the latest reports suggest it has fallen again, without even an El Niño to force it down. nations appear in no danger from rising sea level for the foreseeable future.Polly Toynbee of the Guardian recently wrote that meteorologists had revised their warming predictions to 6 degrees. I wonder where she gets this information? According to what I have read, each time meteorologists improve their GCM’s they revise predicted warming downwards. Ecology writer Zac Goldsmith, writing recently on global warming in the Mail on Sunday said; “open stretches of water have been sighted at the North Pole for the first time in human history”. Really? I have seen a photograph taken on the 18th May 1987, which shows three submarines, USS Billfish, USS Seadevil and HMS Superb, floating in open water at the North Pole. The photograph is signed by the three submarine commanders. These stretches of open water occur regularly during the Arctic summer; the Russian name for them is “polyinas”Here is a letter written to the British Admiralty. A considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been, during the last two years, greatly abated.”   
“2000 square leagues of ice with which the between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years, entirely disappeared.”
“The floods, which have the whole summer inundated all those parts of where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains, afford ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened …”This is not the latest scare story from the greenhouse industry, but extracts from a letter by the President of the Royal Society addressed to the British Admiralty, recommending they send a ship to the to investigate the dramatic changes. The letter was written, not in the year 2000, but in 1817. (Ref; Royal Society, . Nov. 20, 1817. Minutes of Council, Vol. 8. pp.149-153.)

   

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: