The wind and solar pipe-dream

Some of what's not being heard at COP-21:



[via]

Lord Moncton's prediction of Harper's defeat and why Tony Abbot was dumped

Monckton's backstory about UN global governance ambitions and skullduggery is the mother of all conspiracyies theories:

Climate fascism on the move

New York’s attorney general is investigating whether Exxon Mobil lied about climate change risks:

The New York attorney general has begun a sweeping investigation of Exxon Mobil to determine whether the company lied to the public about the risks of climate change or to investors about how those risks might hurt the oil business.

According to people with knowledge of the investigation, Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman issued a subpoena Wednesday evening to Exxon Mobil, demanding extensive financial records, emails and other documents.

Does anyone know with any certainty at all what "climate change risks" really are?  This is looks like a witch hunt.  It would be a lot more fruitful for the AG zealots to investigate whether the UN IPCC "lied" about climate change risks.  They've been exaggerating warming and climate risks for decades.

Pope Francis being misled on climate says former UN IPCC expert

Indur M. Goklany writes:

... [In] Pope Francis’ recent encyclical on the environment ... the Vatican has been laid (sic) astray by its advisors’ statement entitled, Climate Change and the Common Good: A Statement of the Problem and the Demand for Transformative Solutions. It makes claims that contradict empirical facts, and are ethically dubious. 

... The advisors’ “transformative solutions’’ ... would slow the ongoing broad advance in human wellbeing, retard poverty reduction, and reduce the ability to adapt and cope with adversity in general and climate change in particular, especially harming the poor.

... it is a strange ethical calculus that justifies reducing existing gains in human well-being, increasing the cost of humanity’s basic necessities, increasing poverty ... The Vatican’s advisors’moral compasses are apparently broken.

 Mr. Goklany's excellent assessment echos Peter Foster's (and others') here and here.


 

Divestment - the UN's latest climate enthusiasm

UN backs fossil fuel divestment campaign

The UN organisation in charge of global climate change negotiations is backing the fast-growing campaign persuading investors to sell off their fossil fuel assets.  

Of course the UN is backing an overtly activist political climate campaign.  It had already politicized climate "science" through its corrupt UNIPCC.  This was an inevitable next step.

If this were to take hold in any serious way, the world economy would indeed be in deep ka-ka.

Pachauri's fifty shades of green

Peter Foster on the IPCC boss's resignation:

When you look at the long list of Mr. Pachauri’s disingenuities and evasions, you might be inclined to ask why one more (alleged) example of sleaziness would make any difference. 

... Mr. Pachauri’s resignation letter on Tuesday, aptly described by blogger Donna Laframboise as a “two-page love letter to himself,” moved from effrontery to gag-worthiness with its claim that “For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.”

Given that Mr. Pachauri’s hobbies include writing novels featuring the soft-porn adventures of an Indian climate expert ... the question now is whether ... Mr. Pachauri’s karma will run over the IPCC’s dogma.

 The contents of those sexts are bound to be titillating. ... one observer wryly noted,  we’re likely talking about “fifty shades of green.”

 Update: Pachauri admitted to hospital.

UN IPCC climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns

WUWT

From the “the hornier they are the harder they fall” department: The head of the United Nations climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has stepped down amid sexual harassment allegations.

It would have been much better had he been given the boot long ago for failure of  leadership, blatant hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

But we'll take what we can get.

UN IPCC Chaiman accused of sexual harassment

From No Frakking Consensus:

Texts and e-mails allegedly sent by IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri tell a disturbing tale. Months after a female subordinate objected repeatedly and strenuously to his sexual advances, the UN official continued to physically and electronically stalk her.

Mail Today, New Delhi, February 21, 2015

Should we expect Dr. Pachauri to blame global warming for his overheated state?

Media Party group-think on global warming

The lede in Ezra's segment is a medley of Media Party reactions to the latest IPCC report.  An excellent example of the prevailing media group-think (or, rather, useful idiot group-non-think) :

The UN IPCC's synthetic climate alarmism

Peter Foster: Dedicated to promoting synthetic climate alarmism

 The latest synthesis report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the “capstone” of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report — contains no surprises. 

However, it is intriguing for ... the identity of the man to whom it is dedicated — the late Stephen Schneider, a Stanford professor and proponent of bending science in pursuit of a “better world.”  ... famous for his recommendation in 1989 that in order to get “loads of media coverage,” scientists had to “offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.” ... For the IPCC to honour him tells us a great deal about its own orientation which, fortunately, is becoming less relevant by the day.

Also,

... It is filled with what eminent Canadian mathematician Christopher Essex has called “hilarious bamboozling parascientific probability language."

The "new" UN report has driven local and national media climate alarmism for going on a week now -  exactly what Prof Schneider advocated and the IPCC sought.  So, by dedicating it to Schneider maybe the IPCC was, in its own weird, sneaky way, being honest for a change.

See also:IPCC focus on stopping global warming and extreme weather is unscientific and immoral

Breaking! IPCC demands ransom

[h/t WUWT]

Global warming review 2014 - latest UN IPCC report is "climate porn"

Ezra Levant:

BC's many Nobel pretenders

Donna Laframboise, on the 9000 people who helped the UN IPCC "win" the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize:

... When the IPCC was awarded half of the Nobel Peace Prize back in 2007 (Al Gore won the other half), its chairman profoundly over-stepped his authority. Writing to IPCC-affiliated academics en masse, Rajendra Pachauri proclaimed: “This makes each of you Nobel Laureates.”

This, of course, led to many claims by individuals (or by their organizations on their behalf) to be Nobel Prize winners or Nobel Laureates. British Columbia has more than its fair share:

In March 2013, The Walrus magazine published an article it said had been written by a “Nobel laureate” and a “Nobel economist.” But Mark Jaccard, who teaches at Simon Fraser University, has never won a Nobel prize — not in economics or any other field.  

... [Jaccard] is a special advisor to the BC environment ministry’s Climate Action Team. An official web page claims that eight members of that entity were awarded the 2007 Peace Prize. When we stretch the truth so extravagantly, this is where we end up.

It got so bad that the IPCC was prompted to issue an official statement (Dec 2012) to try to stop the practice:

... The prize was awarded to the IPCC as an organization, and not to any individual associated with the IPCC. Thus it is incorrect to refer to any IPCC official, or scientist who worked on IPCC reports, as a Nobel laureate or Nobel Prize winner. ...

As an aside, if anyone has any doubt as to where the BC government stands on the issue of "climate change" it's "Climate Action Plan", "Climate Action Team" and its carbon tax are hints that it brooks no skepticism.

Dirty politics trashing the oil sands

Claudia Cattaneo explains how the EU dishonestly targets the oil sands:

Much like the Keystone XL debacle in Washington, the EU’s proposed Fuel Quality Directive illustrates the hypocrisy of climate change politics — tough to sell at home, the pain of reducing greenhouse gas emissions is pushed abroad to feign the appearance of progress.

... What’s disappointing is that years of Canadian pushback that the directive is discriminatory has not changed the anti-oil sands’ nature of the proposal, spearheaded by EU Climate Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard. ...

 Thanks to the lies and distortions of disloyal Canadian eco-extremists (like the Pembina Institute and David Suzuki) heavily funded by foreign interests, the oil sands have been turned into an international eco-whipping boy. Naïve, goody-two-shoes Canadian companies and governments have spent boat-loads of cash to reduce carbon emissions and to be environmentally responsible.  On the international front all Canadians ask for is a level playing field and honest dealing.

And what do Canadians get in return? Blatant lies and hypocrisy from the likes of  Connie Hedegaard and Barack Obama who threaten trade restrictions and deny approval of pipelines.

The bitter irony is that all of this (the disloyalty, the hypocrisy, the lies, the naïve, earnest good-faith efforts of Canadians, the waste) is premised on fears driven by dubious, unproven theories of catastrophic global warming - theories that are contradicted by 17 years of credible scientific data - data gathered by and for the fear-monger-in-chief, the UNIPCC.

IPCC spin doctors release their 5th report

Ezra explains why it's "not worth the paper it’s printed on":

The IPCC's "decision-based evidence making"

Tom Harris explains:

"The IPCC must take everybody for fools. "

Ross McKitrick:

... [the IPCC's AR5 report claims:] “In summary, the globally-averaged surface temperatures are well within the uncertainty range of all previous IPCC projections, and generally are in the middle of the scenario ranges.” Later, in Chapter 9, it states with “very high confidence” that models can correctly simulate global surface temperature trends.

... The IPCC must take everybody for fools. Its own graph shows that observed temperatures are not within the uncertainty range of projections; they have fallen below the bottom of the entire span. Nor do models simulate surface warming trends accurately; instead they grossly exaggerate them. (Nor do they match them on regional scales, where the fit is typically no better than random numbers.)

...  since we are on the verge of seeing the emergence of data that could rock the foundations of mainstream climatology, this is obviously no time for entering into costly and permanent climate policy commitments based on failed model forecasts.  [Someone call Stephen Harper.]

Terence Corcoran: The tide is rising on climate models and policies

Epic climate model failure, biased science

Roy Spencer:

... The modellers and the IPCC have willingly ignored the evidence for low climate sensitivity for many years ... The discrepancy between models and observations is not a new issue … just one that is becoming more glaring over time.

... Forgive me if I sound frustrated, but we scientists who still believe that climate change can also be naturally forced have been virtually cut out of funding and publication by the “humans-cause-everything-bad-that-happens” juggernaut.










The UNIPCC definition of "climate change":

"A change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods."

The UN is only interested in human factors. And, the definition implicitly assumes that natural variability is well understood ('...nothing to study here, move along..'). The whole game is rigged from the get-go in favour of proving humans are responsible and ignoring natural variability.

The "Secret Santa" blows the whistle on the IPCC

Donna Laframboise:

A week before Christmas, three data sticks containing 661 files and amounting to nearly one gigabyte of material came into my possession. They were created by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Friends of Science: "... Whistleblower Files End Climate Change Catastrophe Cult"

... (IPCC) internal files ... reveal more attempts by agenda-driven activists to skew the science on climate change. In 2012 the UK met weather office revealed no global warming for at least 16 years while IPCC admits global warming predictions were way off and there is no trend in extreme weather.

... “In October 13, 2012 the Daily Mail reported that the UK Met Hadley weather office revealed there had not been any global warming for 16 years despite a substantial rise in carbon dioxide (CO2).”

... two weeks later on December 13, 2012 Alec Rawls leaked 14 draft chapters of the upcoming IPCC report on-line....confirmed the catastrophic warming scenarios of the previous IPCC climate models were way off, far too high, by several factors. ... Further, the IPCC itself stated that there was no trend toward more extreme weather, confirming the Oct. 31, 2012 Wall Street Journal statement by Roger Pielke Jr.

... “And finally, the IPCC admitted and then evaded recognition that the sun is a major factor in climate change,”

... “A trillion dollars has been wasted on carbon reduction schemes in the past decade,” ...  “Generations of children have been terrified and taught absurd anti-scientific group-think, economies have been bankrupted in the ‘rush to low-carbon renewables’ – such as Ontario, the UK, Spain, California – falsely believing people can ‘save the planet’ by reducing carbon dioxide.

IPCC AR5 draft leaked

IPCC AR5 draft leaked, contains game-changing admission of enhanced solar forcing – as well as a lack of warming to match model projections, and reversal on ‘extreme weather’.