Climate Changed de-bunked, by the godfather

[98valk]

http://knightstemplarinternational.com/2016/10/james-lovelock-godfather-green-climate-change-religion-bunk/

James Lovelock, inventor of Gaia Theory and godfather of the modern environmental movement, has finally renounced the green religion.

Climate alarmism, he says, is not “remotely scientific”; one volcano could make more difference to global warming than humans ever could; the computer models are “unreliable”; greens have behaved “deplorably”; and anyone who tries to “predict more than five to ten years is a bit of an idiot.

Though this is not the first time Lovelock has rowed back on his earlier climate catastrophism – in 2012 he was already admitting “I made a mistake” – it’s his most emphatic rejection yet of the green litany.

Lovelock, 97, ascribes the dramatic change in his once fervently alarmist beliefs to the fact that he has “grown up.”

Only ten years ago – when the inventor, scientist and environmentalist was a mere spring chicken of 87 – Lovelock argued in his book The Revenge of Gaia that mankind was doomed.

Because of global warming, he predicted, “billions will die” and the few survivors would have to retreat to the Arctic which would be one of the few habitable places left on earth.

But now he admits to being “laid back about climate change.”

    “CO2 is going up, but nowhere near as fast as they thought it would. The computer models just weren’t reliable. In fact I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy, this climate change. You’ve only got to look at Singapore. It’s two-and-a-half times higher than the worst-case scenario for climate change, and it’s one of the most desirable cities in the world to live in.”

Besides, he says, nature is more powerful than the computer models:

    It’s only got to take one sizable volcano to erupt and all the models, everything else, is right off the board.

Lovelock was speaking in an interview with the fervently alarmist Guardian whose interviewer Decca Aitkenhead was naturally somewhat taken aback by his views which she ascribed in part to his temperament as an “incorrigible subversive.”

But Lovelock himself insists that it is simply a question of looking at the evidence.

One experience that has sharply concentrated his thoughts is the cost of heating his home, an old mill in Devon. When the heating bills rose to £6,000 for just six months, he realised that he would have to downsize and has now moved to a smaller cottage on Chesil Beach in Dorset. This claim has brought him into conflict with another green guru, the chunky knit Guardianista George Monbiot.

    “I remember George Monbiot took me up on it and wrote that it was impossible, that I had to be lying. But I wasn’t lying, I’ve got the figures.” Monbiot doesn’t quite accuse him of lying, in fairness; just of “talking rubbish” and “making wild statements”. In any case, he says that in the US he found he could heat a house for six months, in temperatures of -20C (-4F), for just £60. As a result, he has withering contempt for environmentalists’ opposition to fracking. “You see, gas in America is incredibly cheap, because of fracking,” he says. But what about the risk of triggering earthquakes? He rolls his eyes.

    “Sure enough, that’s true, there will be an increase. But they’re tiny little tremors, they would be imperceptible. The only trouble is that you can detect them. The curse of my life has been that I’ve spent a lot of time inventing devices that are exceedingly sensitive. And the moment somebody can detect something, they’re going to attach a number to it, and then they make a fuss about it.” He chuckles, then pauses. “I’m not anti-green in the sense that I’m in favour of polluting the world with every damn thing we make. I think we’ve got to be careful. But I’m afraid, human nature being what it is, the thing gets exaggerated out of all proportion, and the greens have behaved deplorably instead of being reasonably sensible.”

Besides Monbiot, Lovelock finds time for a little dig at yet another fervent green catastrophist the Prince of Wales:

    He was once invited to Buckingham Palace, where he told Princess Anne: “Your brother nearly killed me.” Having read that Prince Charles had installed grass-burning boilers at Highgrove, Lovelock had tried one in his house. “It’s supposed to smoulder and keep the place warm; but it doesn’t, because it goes out, and clouds and clouds of smoke come out.” He giggles. “Princess Anne thought this was hilariously funny.”

His heretical stance on nuclear energy too is likely to alienate many of his former admirers in the green movement:

    Even more heretical than his enthusiasm for fracking is Lovelock’s passionate support for nuclear power. But, like fracking, he says, it offers only “a stopgap” solution. “Because in the long term, they’ll use up all the uranium.” How long would that take? He pauses to do some quick mental arithmetic, as casually as I might tot up how many pints of milk to grab from Sainsburys.

    “Let’s see … I think uranium that is affordable to extract would last about 50 years, something in that range. It might be 100. When you’ve used all that up, you go to thorium, and that would last you three times as long as uranium – so, shall we say, about 200 years?” The most sensible energy solution would be to cover 100 sq miles of the Sahara in solar panels. “It would supply the whole of Europe with all the energy they needed,” but it won’t happen “because it would be so easy for terrorists to go and bugger it up”. So for now, nuclear energy is the only viable option.

Not that any of this matters much anyway, Lovelock suggests, because by the end of the century robots will have taken over and they probably won’t find much use for us.

    The implications for climate change are obvious. “The world that they’re going to be comfortable in is wildly different from the one that we feel comfortable in. So once they really get established, they will – with regret – start losing organic life.” Will they care about rising temperatures? “They won’t give a fourpenny snuggle about the temperature, because to them the change will be slow, and they can stand quite a big change without any fuss. They could accommodate infinitely greater change through climate change than we can, before things get tricky for them. It’s what the world can stand that is the important thing. They’re going to have a safe platform to live in, so they don’t want Gaia messed about too much.”

[Robert]

Probably had a change of heart because he knows hes going to die and meet his maker so hes trying to set things right.

[0leman]

Hey guys, the resent Global warming is real.  Been happening since the last little ice are several hundred years ago.  The part that is questionable is whether man is playing a part in it and if so how much?

If you listen to the "experts", they say what warming has occurred since 1989 is all man caused.  CO2 is the reason.  Of course the projections of the UN's climate models, read computer program, shows that it is so.  No actual data, just projections.   Why wasn't there natural warming during this period?   How do you separate the natural from man caused.  Good question.  I haven't been able to read with any certainty that they can. 

Of course there are folks who are convinced that the so called "Global Climate Change" is really a means to redistribute the wealth of the world.  Take from the "haves" and give to the "have not".  AND to put the world under one control, the UN. 

[dreamaker]

I believe that climate change is real! But rather than being a direct effect of human interaction, I don’t believe that. In my opinion human interaction is just a slight contributor, and gov. uses it as a means to promote global fear and chaos on the tax payers.  The way I see it, is the effect we have on nature in comparison, would be like taking a five gallon bucket and try and drain Lake Michigan with it.  Making statements that our cars are a major factor in global warming, I think is crap.  When I watch the weather on TV, and they show the highest temps records for the day, many are in the 1800’s where they had zip for carbon emissions.  I believe the earth goes through cycles, and eventually we as humans will be eliminated, just like the pervious life forms before us, and will start all over again.  In life there are two books of rules, there is the human version and there is nature’s version, and the only one that counts is nature’s version, if the human version coincide with nature, you have harmony, if you don’t coincide with nature, you have total elimination. It’s simpler that you think!

[Gavin_Sons]

Just more political bullshit. The government just wants total control over your lives that they will say and do anything to get that power. They told us for years the glaciers would be gone in a few short years, oh crap, now they are getting bigger? Now what do we tell the fine Americans? Oh yeah, it's not global warming, it's climate change and this is a direct effect from you fine Americans polluting the atmosphere. Bullshit, the earth goes through warming and cooling phases, like I said just something they can use to control what you do.

[Jersey mike]

when I was a kid in '78-'79, the news was all about the next coming Ice Age. When that didn't happen it became Global Warming and the ice caps were melting. Some say the Sun is getting hotter while others say the Sun is cooling. Does anyone really know what Mother Nature is really doing.

You can YouTube Climate Change and come up with answers that are all over the place.

The Earth is a living thing. Have we changed Her make up of Nature? You're damn right we have.

We've polluted water and air and stripped her of many acres of necessary trees but we're still here.

Just this week a news article was out about the Fukishima reactor nuclear accident and how it's pollution in the Pacific is greater than expected and is rapidly spreading.

Will Mother Nature fight back? She always does.

Here's a video from '78 and the up coming Ice Age theory.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ei-_SXLMMfo

along side are complete opposite videos among the hundreds of news reports you can find anywhere out on the net.

[dreamaker]

You have to understand something, nature doesn’t conform to our needs, we conform to nature’s demands. Nature provides everything we need, our problem is we think we are smarter than nature, nature has a long history, our is like a fart in a wind storm. I noticed two things that nature demands, balance and survival of life as a whole, not just human’s survival.  We are just one small part of a large group of species.  Like Clint Eastwood would say, We are a legend in our own minds.

[Robert]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

[98valk]

to understand everything read this book The Greening. written in early '90s

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/greening.shtml

http://thirdworldtraveler.com/New_World_Order/The_Greening.html

[dreamaker]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

Correct me if I am wrong, but CO2 is what plant life takes in and gives off Oxi. Of course tearing down trees and other plant life and replacing it with concrete has nothing to do with the balance of the environment.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

Probably zero dollars and no freedoms lost. Probably zero cost on pollution controls also. If you will remember we never ratified the treaty and are not bound to its protocols.

[98valk]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

Correct me if I am wrong, but CO2 is what plant life takes in and gives off Oxi. Of course tearing down trees and other plant life and replacing it with concrete has nothing to do with the balance of the environment.

there are studies that show there are more trees now than 50 yrs ago.

[Robert]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

Correct me if I am wrong, but CO2 is what plant life takes in and gives off Oxi. Of course tearing down trees and other plant life and replacing it with concrete has nothing to do with the balance of the environment.

 


Meathead you may want to listen to O that has committed to the Kyoto protocol without ratification
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmz6srlnur8
The US has now made a pact with several Asian countries called the Asian Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Participants want to implement an alternative strategy to tackle climate change.

I can tell you right now that 10k is added to trucks because of catalytic converters just to put a figure behind only one small piece of the total cost of the controls. How much is the catalytic converter cost on new motorcycles that produce so little in emissions and convert it to CO2 the very gas we are trying to control. Another black eye is ozone remember the scare?

[Patrick]

The climate changes, it has too, thats its job. Always has, probably always will.

I think there is a point of demising returns when it comes to most things, including emission control. And, it seems we have almost hit that point.

I don't know anyone that likes dirty air or water,etc. And, I think we have cleaned up a lot since Nixon got his baby thru congress [ EPA].  But, as in anything governmental, that agency has gone nutz.

The computer models from the liberal funded 'researchers' have not worked, but, most of us already know this. We are now still coming out of 2 ice ages. Northern America and Canada was once home to tropical plants and animals. Indian villages have been found in over 100 ft of water in the Great Lakes. When Cortez was plundering his way thru Mexico and California in the 16th century they called the LA Basin the 'Valley of Smoke' and I don't think there were many smoke stacks and dirty ole tailpipes at that time. WW2 aircraft  that had to land on the Arctic ice cap are now being recovered, and, recovered from 250-300ft of ice.  But, then, there are folks that still think Columbus discovered America.
Naval records show the sea level as being at its highest in the Florida Keys during 1940-45 and 1970-75.

[Robert]

The climate changes, it has too, thats its job. Always has, probably always will.

I think there is a point of demising returns when it comes to most things, including emission control. And, it seems we have almost hit that point.

I don't know anyone that likes dirty air or water,etc. And, I think we have cleaned up a lot since Nixon got his baby thru congress [ EPA].  But, as in anything governmental, that agency has gone nutz.

The computer models from the liberal funded 'researchers' have not worked, but, most of us already know this. We are now still coming out of 2 ice ages. Northern America and Canada was once home to tropical plants and animals. Indian villages have been found in over 100 ft of water in the Great Lakes. When Cortez was plundering his way thru Mexico and California in the 16th century they called the LA Basin the 'Valley of Smoke' and I don't think there were many smoke stacks and dirty ole tailpipes at that time. WW2 aircraft  that had to land on the Arctic ice cap are now being recovered, and, recovered from 250-300ft of ice.  But, then, there are folks that still think Columbus discovered America.
Naval records show the sea level as being at its highest in the Florida Keys during 1940-45 and 1970-75.

As a point of interest cars are about 95 percent non polluting it has worked in strange ways because people who used to kill themselves wake up with a head ache and thats about it. The other 5 percent will be very expensive to do and will not accomplish that much. Like you said the law of diminishing return.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I wonder how much The Kyoto Protocol is not only costing us in dollars but in freedoms lost. This is not to mention the cost of all pollution controls on cars, and trucks and now industry. Without CO2 the stuff we exhale they would have no way to siphon money from our pockets.

Correct me if I am wrong, but CO2 is what plant life takes in and gives off Oxi. Of course tearing down trees and other plant life and replacing it with concrete has nothing to do with the balance of the environment.

 


Meathead you may want to listen to O that has committed to the Kyoto protocol without ratification
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmz6srlnur8
The US has now made a pact with several Asian countries called the Asian Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Participants want to implement an alternative strategy to tackle climate change.

I can tell you right now that 10k is added to trucks because of catalytic converters just to put a figure behind only one small piece of the total cost of the controls. How much is the catalytic converter cost on new motorcycles that produce so little in emissions and convert it to CO2 the very gas we are trying to control. Another black eye is ozone remember the scare?

Anybody that lived in SoCal in the 70's remembers how bad air pollution was. Catalytic converters came into being to cut back on pollution way before any Kyoto treaty was ever thought about.  I for one am glad we have less pollution regardless if it helps with less global warming. Growing up in Alaska and seeing the huge reductions of glaciers, snow pack, and higher temps. There is no doubt in my opinion the earth is warming. How much that is due to humans and how much is cyclical is up for debate. I do not see how less pollution can be up for debate though.

[..]

1972 Rutland Water froze over it was so bloody cold.

1976 England had a summer heat wave and is still remembered as the "Summer of 76".

Idiots would tell you that shows global warming. Oops sorry climate change. Must keep up with the latest terminology foisted on us by the money makers/takers.

[98valk]

The climate changes, it has too, thats its job. Always has, probably always will.

I think there is a point of demising returns when it comes to most things, including emission control. And, it seems we have almost hit that point.

I don't know anyone that likes dirty air or water,etc. And, I think we have cleaned up a lot since Nixon got his baby thru congress [ EPA].  But, as in anything governmental, that agency has gone nutz.

The computer models from the liberal funded 'researchers' have not worked, but, most of us already know this. We are now still coming out of 2 ice ages. Northern America and Canada was once home to tropical plants and animals. Indian villages have been found in over 100 ft of water in the Great Lakes. When Cortez was plundering his way thru Mexico and California in the 16th century they called the LA Basin the 'Valley of Smoke' and I don't think there were many smoke stacks and dirty ole tailpipes at that time. WW2 aircraft  that had to land on the Arctic ice cap are now being recovered, and, recovered from 250-300ft of ice.  But, then, there are folks that still think Columbus discovered America.
Naval records show the sea level as being at its highest in the Florida Keys during 1940-45 and 1970-75.

As a point of interest cars are about 95 percent non polluting it has worked in strange ways because people who used to kill themselves wake up with a head ache and thats about it. The other 5 percent will be very expensive to do and will not accomplish that much. Like you said the law of diminishing return.

since the late '90s the exhaust is cleaner than the engines intake air. The EPA has made the cars to clean up the ambient air.
The EPA was trying to do that same thing to the NAVY about ten yrs ago, when they went secretly testing the seawater discharge water coming off the side of the ship. Said the NAVY was polluting the waters with all of these heavy metals coming from the ships piping systems. Millions of dollars later the NAVY proved that what the EPA was measuring was the existing heavy metals naturally in the seawater. The ships piping systems were not the cause.
I just retired from the Navy's environmental sections after 33 yrs. The one section in my department worked on proving the EPA wrong. I was there.

[Robert]

I just retired from the Navy's environmental sections after 33 yrs. The one section in my department worked on proving the EPA wrong. I was there.

Now that is cool, I bet you have some stories, next time dont hold out. 

[Robert]

Gains Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater Than Losses: NASA Study

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/101832/20151101/gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses-nasa-study.htm

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

[..]

Gains Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater Than Losses: NASA Study

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/101832/20151101/gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses-nasa-study.htm

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

Ya gotta read the links !!!

Studies show that globally, the decreases in Arctic sea ice far exceed the increases in Antarctic sea ice.

[..]

No population voting before the elite decide

http://www.france24.com/en/20161004-eu-parliament-backs-paris-climate-change-deal-cop21

[98valk]

Gains Of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater Than Losses: NASA Study

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/101832/20151101/gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses-nasa-study.htm

Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

Ya gotta read the links !!!

Studies show that globally, the decreases in Arctic sea ice far exceed the increases in Antarctic sea ice.

remember these people with the agenda skew their results by testing for less ice in summer time when actually the ice is increasing more than before during the winter months. just like the big lie and it has been proven a lie about the polar bears.
I have posted before all of the scientific reports that we are entering another ice age.
search the UN push for climate change based on junk science. read the book link I provided. read the reports of the UN asking hollywood to help push their agenda in the movies and TV. read the reports of the falsified data revealed when all the emails of the leading researchers were hacked a few yrs ago in england.
there is a ton of info out there documented that climate change caused by mans' activity is a hoax, and many at the forefront of the movement are now multi-billionaires.

[dreamaker]

Not saying everything said here is wrong or correct, but I think I can safely say, it may be distorted in some manner.   Allot of information and good points being made, but is it fact, and is it true!  Just because it has been written, does it mean it is true, now when someone gets a Masters or a PhD, does it mean that what they say is a guarantee to be true, or does it mean they lean towards company and profitable success?  What have we gained here, in your discussion?  I know, that maybe the way I present things seem whack out, but I feel the Nature is like a freight train, and we do very little to hinder it’s game plan.  We are so arrogant to think that every time we create disruptions in the plan, that when Nature modifies or corrects the issue, it has to always benefit us in some way.  Again! Nature provides for life as a whole, not just for human benefits.  So bottom line here, what is written and said, is it true or is it for profit and personal gain???  Pretty Whacko Hey!!

[0leman]

The arctic/Antarctic ice extents have only been measured accurately since satellites were put into to use in the later part of the 70's.   There was no accurate measurement during the 30's when we had a major warm period.  So what were the sizes during that time?

Plus the temps have been rising since the last little ice are several hundred years ago.  Wouldn't the arctic ice extent  be showing some decline?

For those that really are in favor of wind energy, take a look at what really happen to Australia during a recent major storm in the southern part.   They suffered a major black out because of the up and down surges of the power due to wind turbines going from zero to max in a short period of time. 

[dreamaker]

For those that really are in favor of wind energy, take a look at what really happen to Australia during a recent major storm in the southern part.   They suffered a major black out because of the up and down surges of the power due to wind turbines going from zero to max in a short period of time.  

You think with all these Brainiacs out there, they would have anticipated that, it's kind of like building a car and forgetting to put brakes on it.

I think now of days, ice caps is the least of our problems, while you are sitting around worrying about ice, brain eating bacteria has infected you through bad contact lens hygiene. People have to quit this tunnel vision, and look at the big picture.

[G-Man]

Of course there are folks who are convinced that the so called "Global Climate Change" is really a means to redistribute the wealth of the world.  Take from the "haves" and give to the "have not".  AND to put the world under one control, the UN. 

It's called cap and trade.

The new catch phrase for wealth transfer is now called Climate Justice.

[..]

Of course there are folks who are convinced that the so called "Global Climate Change" is really a means to redistribute the wealth of the world.  Take from the "haves" and give to the "have not".  AND to put the world under one control, the UN. 

It's called cap and trade.

The new catch phrase for wealth transfer is now called Climate Justice.