Believe!
The Guardian reports……
A French TV weatherman has been taken off air after writing a book in which he questions climate change. Philippe Verdier, a familiar face on the state-run France 2 channel, said he had been told not to return to work for the foreseeable future.
“I received a letter asking me not to come,” Verdier told RTL radio this week. “I don’t know any more than that, I don’t know how long it will last. It’s all to do with my book.”
Verdier had taken time off to undertake a publicity tour for his book – entitled Climat Investigation – but had been expecting to return to work.
“It’s France Télévisions’ decision, I’m not on holiday,” he said.
In the book, Verdier throws doubt on the findings of leading climate scientists and political leaders, saying they have “taken the world hostage”. It is timed to coincide with France’s hosting of a major UN climate summit in December.
We are told that….
France Télévision’s said its rules “prevent anyone using their professional status … to push forward their personal opinions”.
That never stopped Roger Harrabin. Then again as an english graduate I suppose he might not be classed as a ‘professional’ when it comes to climate change science.
And it is curious that the BBC, as far as I can tell, made no mention of this very significant story…from Christopher Booker in the Telegraph….
Judges plan to outlaw climate change ‘denial’
We might think that a semi-secret, international conference of top judges, held in the highest courtroom in Britain, to propose that it should be made illegal for anyone to question the scientific evidence for man-made global warming, was odd enough to be worthy of front-page coverage….But only a series of startling posts by a sharp-eyed Canadian blogger, Donna Laframboise (on Nofrakkingconsensus), have alerted us to what a bizarre event this judicial gathering turned out to be (the organisers even refused to give her the names of those who attended).
The fact that it could be seriously proposed in the highest courtroom in the land that the law should now be used to suppress any further debate on what has become one of the most contentious issues in the history of science (greeted with applause from the distinguished legal audience) speaks volumes about the curious psychological state to which the great global warming scare has reduced so many of the prominent figures who today exercise power and influence over the life of our Western societies.
Curious that the BBC would censor that when they are so often keen to bring us news of what judges and lawyers think on subjects close to the BBC’s heart…Migrant crisis: UK response criticised by senior former judges.
Curious the BBC would censor news that judges would seek to silence free speech on climate change when the BBC along with the Guardian et al are at the forefront of protest journalism when it comes to the government trying to close down certain debates.
I think for most scientists the language must seem moronic, as the PR language must be dominated by scientifically unqualified environmental activists.
So, for more scientific common sense language.
(1) For Climate Change, read, Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide induced surface warming.
(2) For leading climate scientists, read, environmental activists in a position of authority, with some possibly having scientific qualifications, but very rarely with causational climate science qualifications.
(3) Outlaw Climate Change denial, read, Outlaw anyone who thinks that Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide induced surface warming is not the cause, due to evidence for both a formula based on thermodynamics and also solar induced changes to cloud Albedo being the cause of Climate Change.
(4) Scientific evidence for man-made global warming, read, an error caused by a 22 year coincidence of a CO2 level rise and a Global Warming rise that ended in 1997. Plus a UN institution that dustbins any scientific discovery that contradicts the political consensus, such as thermodynamics, isotopic evidence that only four percent of atmospheric CO2 and therefore 84 percent of the increase in CO2 was a natural CO2 increase, in line with a correlation with an 800 year deep ocean thermal lag 800 years after the medieval warm period, also, sun spot number and length of solar cycle correlations with high energy cosmic rays, cloud albedo and ultimately climate change.
I told Piers Corbyn that Supreme Court judge Lord Carnwath was after him and he could face Philippe Sands QC from Cherie Blair’s Matrix Chambers, in the International Court of Justice. But no answer yet.
But for all of us, both scientists and non-scientists, the whole problem is at the very CORE of Climate Science, the Arrhenius method of calculating the Greenhouse effect (used in computer models) must be false, as the formula never produces a calibration for anything else after you hammer it to fit observations, while the thermodynamics based formula from the Unified Theory of Climate always produces what is observed.
The real question now is, will the scientific method survive the political assault on it by left wing activists and government. Global Warming scam will die, but the debasement of the scientific method, will be the long term victim of this scam.
Agreed-just read a long speech given by Dr Patrick Moore, one of the original founders of Greenpeace, but no longer involved. The whole speech given to the Global Warning Policy Foundation, is too long to reproduce here nevertheless Dr Moore, states ‘The contention that human emissions are now the dominant influence on climate is simply a hypothesis, rather than a universally accepted scientific theory. It is therefore correct, indeed verging on compulsory in the scientific tradition, to be sceptical of those who express certainty that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over”.
But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees.
Dr Moore hoped during that speech to demonstrate that human omissions of CO2 have already saved lives on our planet from an untimely end. ‘That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die in less than two million years from today.’ And finally states ‘The land is disturbed for a blink of an eye in geological time and is then returned to a sustainable boreal forest ecosystem with cleaner sand. And as a bonus we get the fuel to power our weed-eaters, scooters, motorcycles, cars, trucks, buses, trains, and aircraft.’
So let us all attack the Minister of Transport to clear away this duplicitous charge he makes against the omissions from our vehicles.
A lefty liberal does the unthinkable and actually researches the state of climate science for himself, in a genuinely independent and logical way. The linked essay is the result.
View at Medium.com
In the 15 years I have been engaging with the Climate debate, reading scientific papers, blogs and reading climate books, I have come to the same conclusion. The Climate Change alarmists routinely ignore the core rules of the scientific method and reject out of hand, the massive amount of empirical evidence which falsifies the CAGW hypothesis, whilst supporting innacurate, false and adjusted data, so long as it agrees with the hypothesis. Doing that is NOT science. It is Politics, religion or simply fraud.
Patrick Moore – Canadian scientist, ex Greenpeace, has some excellent talks on this topic on YouTube, easy for us non scientific types to follow.
He certainly does-mostly destroyed by the present duplicitous harmful political & media outpourings. How long will it be at the present level of CO2 depletion until most or all of life on Earth is threatened with extinction by lack of CO2 in the atmosphere?
Surely the truth is that ‘Climate Change’ has become a religion, with fervent preachers, disciples and adherents and all that this implies as regards blind faith, mania and intolerance? In the main it seems to have replaced Christianity but is only one aspect of so much irrational and destructive human activity over the past few decades.
I enjoyed this:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/10/15/greenpeace-founder-delivers-powerful-annual-lecture-praises-carbon-dioxide-full-text/
from a founder member of Greenpeace!