Jim Sillars: Climate con will feel a chill wind

Share this article
Have your say

The Met Office’s latest findings, from 30,000 measuring stations, shows the world climate, despite India and China pumping out massive amounts of carbon dioxide, has not warmed at all during the last 15 years.

Such news is bad news for the global warming lobby, which is a more accurate term than “scientific community”. Propaganda from this lobby has claimed dodgy science as truth, and attacked those who dared expose the untruths. It used the infamous “ice hockey stick” graph, allegedly showing no great movement in climate for 1000 years, then an incredible rise (the blade part of the stick) in the 20th century, to panic the world into the Kyoto agreement.

When the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) launched its infamous 2001 report, its chairman did so in front of a huge blown-up poster of the hockey stick. It got six mentions in the text. It was hailed as proof of the link between CO2 emissions and higher temperatures.

The “stick” was garbage. The long handle supposedly showing no significant temperature movement over 1000 years, missed out the Medieval warming period, and the little ice age. Those who proved it garbage were subjected to vicious attacks.

It’s a lobby that claims deep knowledge for a branch of science, climatology, that is in its infancy. A lobby that has captured the intellectually challenged bunch who pass for today’s political leadership, leading them into a delusional world where they believe they can control nature and stop the world’s climate warming beyond another 2.5 degrees. The arrogance is breathtaking. So is the stupidity.

Even as they issued the fact of no warming, the Met Office insisted that the sun, which some believe has had an important influence on the non-warming, is far less important than man-made CO2.

The Met Office and others have a vested interest in global warming, being among its greatest promoters.

If they are wrong egg will be all over their scientific faces, so they cannot admit to being wrong. Thus the relegation of the importance of the sun.

You don’t need to be a scientist to know that if the sun wasn’t where it is, and did the things it does, like going through 11-year cycles of sun spots – giant eruptions of energy – we wouldn’t have a climate to argue over.

As the director of Denmark’s Centre for Sun Climate Research said: “It will take a long battle to convince some climate scientists that the sun is important. It may well be that the sun is going to demonstrate this on its own, without the need for their help.”

What he was referring to were the conjectures, arising out of evidence about the sun’s effects, that we may be heading for global cooling, rather than the world frying and seas swamping this island. A very cold period will bring greater harm to humankind than global warming. Warming has been associated with better times for humans, as crops grow more plentifully, whereas a number of adverse events – disasters – are to be found when our ancestors were in a deep freeze, with crop failures.

The peculiarity of the global warming lobby is that it is partly funded by governments to lobby governments.

Friends of the Earth received ¤3,101,245 from the European Union between 2007 and 2009. WWF did better, with ¤8,794,595.

Between 1998 and 2009, the EU disbursed ¤66 million to the green lobby. It’s a kind of “you fund us and we’ll keep forecasting climate catastrophe and you can produce green taxes on the basis of our forecasts that scare your citizens”. Some might call this a corrupt relationship. It’s certainly not a healthy one.

Organisations, scientists and governments have so committed themselves to global warming that they need us to keep believing it. Those lucrative funding projects for scientists, those jollies to conferences in five-star hotels to “save the world”, the wind turbines making cash for everyone except us paying energy bills – will all come to an end once the people rumble the climate con.

The rumbling is happening. Tory MPs now feel emboldened enough to demand a big cut in subsidies to wind turbines – the things that produce only 20-28 per cent of capacity when the wind is blowing at suitable strength, nothing when the wind blows too hard, and nothing when there is no wind.

What they do produce for the owners is a big subsidy to the tune of £400m a year. The total green tax on our energy bills is £1.1 billion. We are told the wind is free. How come free wind needs a subsidy to convert it to electricity? You only subsidise the non-economical.

The green lobby, with its stunts and scares, has been shameless in its perversion of science in pursuit of hijacking government policies.

As Atte Korhola, Professor of Environmental Change, University of Helsinki, said: “When later generations learn about climate science, they will classify the beginning of the 21st century as an embarrassing chapter in the history of science.

“They will wonder about our time and use it as a warning . . . as the actual research topic of climate change turned into a political and social playground.”