Daily Archives: 3. March 2021

SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO₂ Goals

Image : Bob’s Cartoons

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins,all of them imaginary.”
– H.L. Mencken

“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely
exercised for the good of its victims
may be the most oppressive.”
– C. S. Lewis

•

H/t Bob’s Cartoons for pointing this out in a recent tweet.

MOST citizens, the world over, would have thought that “the vaccine(s)” would have put an end to draconian, deadly and pointless lockdowns. Don’t bet on it. Lockdown’s, under the guise of „climate change“, are now being recommended, by ‘the experts’, to stay for good.

Surprise, surprise.

The Coronavirus has made our leadership class more powerful than they have ever been. Why would they relinquish that?

Via The Guardian :

Equivalent of Covid emissions drop needed every two years – study | Greenhouse gas emissions | The Guardian

*

Never letting a crisis go to waste, the United Nation’s meteorological affiliate, WMO, belled-the-cat back in November, 2020 – lockdowns, your ’new normal‘.

“But the lockdown provides a platform to grow back better and take #ClimateAction” — WMO

According to WMO, if CO₂ concentrations didn’t budge, at all, during the most comprehensive global science experiment ever undertaken in mankind’s history (global industrial lockdown), then how do we know that they are even ‘ours’ to “bring down”?

The Guardian article notes „Lockdowns around the world led to an unprecedented fall in emissions of about 7% in 2020, or about 2.6bn tonnes of CO2„.

NOAA current data affirms that CO₂ levels are higher now, not lower, than at the same period in 2020.

Global Monitoring Laboratory – Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases | NOAA

***

ClimateChange™️ has morphed into a $1.5 TRILLION per year, or $4 BILLION per day business, according to a 2015 figure by Climate Change Business Journal. And, besides the lucrative and seemingly unlimited taxpayer funds available to feed-the-green-beast, far too many egos, jobs and reputations are now at stake for ClimateChange™️ (and now suggested endless lockdowns) to go anywhere soon.

It’s not science. It’s politics and power at play, and you’re paying the piper, and the ultimate price.

•

Related :

CO2 Related :

***

THE Climatism Tip Jar – Help Support The Fight Against Dangerous, Costly and Unscientific Climate Alarm

via Climatism

Posted: March 4, 2021 | Author:Jamie Spry

https://climatism.blog/2021/03/04/surprise-surprise-global-lockdown-every-two-years-needed-to-meet-paris-co%e2%82%82-goals/

How about a Duty of Care to keep electricity cheap and teach teenagers real science?

A group of teenagers want to stop the expansion of a coal mine in Australia. They have taken a class action out against the Government because we all know Governments are supposed to manage the weather better.

Well you’d be cross too, if you thought careless old folk were going to bring you slightly warmer weather!

A duty of care’: Australian teenagers take their climate crisis plea to court

The Guardian

Eight teenagers and an octogenarian nun head to an Australian court on Tuesday to launch what they hope will prove to be a landmark case – one that establishes the federal government’s duty of care in protecting future generations from a worsening climate crisis.

If successful, the people behind the class action believe it may set a precedent that stops the government approving new fossil fuel projects.

Because the last thing you’d want is democratically elected Ministers to chose how we use national resources.

As with any novel legal argument, its chances of success are unclear, but the case is not happening in isolation.

So it is an ambit claim, backed by someone with money.  Who? This could be a form of lawfare, and we all know who the beneficiaries would be if this case “gets lucky”.

The case is a response to a proposal by Whitehaven Coal to extend its Vickery coalmine in northern New South Wales. The expansion of the mine could lead to an extra 100m tonnes of CO2 – about 20% of Australia’s annual climate footprint – being released into the atmosphere as the extracted coal is shipped overseas and burned to make steel and generate electricity.

“The decisions that they make right now will impact us in the future. We’re the ones who are going to have to live with the decisions, we’re going to have to raise the next generation under those decisions, and we just want a future that is guaranteed to be safe for us,”…

So teenagers want a future that is “guaranteed safe”, but think they should be able to make heating and air conditioning unaffordable for senior citizens, right now? There’s another Duty of Care here.

The case hinges on the idea that if we stop digging up our coal, other nations will copy us. Otherwise if we keep our coal underground, all we are doing is creating great reasons for other people to dig up their coal and sell it to our customers.

One Guardian commenter, Sandra says “ the climate crisis cannot be entrusted to political players. Ideology, vested interests, political donations and fear of losing seats means that the Australian Government is compromised and decisions made are invalid.” Climate must be depoliticised she demands! Too true.  But she wants totalitarian rule by PhD: “It [control of the weather] must be given completely over to the climate scientists.”

Depoliticize climate science says Jo? Yes please. But who gets to pick the people who call themselves “a climate scientist”? We can’t leave that to Vice Chancellors who will sack any professor that threatens the money flow and sends a satirical email. But hey, these are big decisions with many stakeholders. So let’s ask the voters. They can pick representatives…. we could call that  “Parliament”?

The Duty of Care Method for ruling a country could get right out of hand. Old folk could sue Governments for risking their health, then young workers could sue the government for destroying their jobs.

Croakey — for those who want a little more information on the legal side:

What are the teenagers arguing?

The young plaintiffs are not bringing their case under environmental law, which would be the traditional way to launch a legal challenge objecting to a coal mine.

Environmental law invites government decision-makers to balance competing concerns — such as economic benefits versus environmental impact — with no clear stipulation as to how much weight to give each relevant factor.

There is limited recourse to argue a decision is wrong because the positive and negative impacts were not given particular priority by a minister. This means decision-making on major projects is largely within the political realm.

Instead, the plaintiffs are arguing the Environment Minister shouldn’t approve the coal proposal because doing so would breach a duty of care owed by the Minister to protect them from the harmful impacts of climate change. This includes more frequent extreme weather events, and destruction of the natural systems that support human life.

The case has parallels with a landmark Dutch case, where it was successfully argued in 2019 that the Dutch Government breached its duty of care to its citizens through inadequate action on climate change.

For the Australian case to succeed, the Court will first need to consider whether a duty of care exists in Australian law. There is no statutory duty (under laws created by the parliament), so the Court would need to “find” the duty as existing in common law.

Then, the plaintiffs would need to establish that the duty would be breached by the environment minister signing off on the coal project.

Where is the Duty of Care to look after our civilisation?

via JoNova

https://ift.tt/3e5V1LL

March 3, 2021 at 01:45PM

HadCRUT, Numbers 4 And 5

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

The HadCRUT record is one of several main estimates of the historical variation in global average surface temperature. It’s kept by the good folks at the University of East Anglia, home of the Climategate scandal.

Periodically, they update the HadCRUT data. They’ve just done so again, going from HadCRUT4 to HadCRUT5.

So to check if you’ve been following the climate lunacy, here’s a pop quiz. What did the new record do to the HadCRUT historical temperature trend?

• It decreased the trend, or

• It increased the trend?

Yep, you’re right … it increased the trend. You’re as shocked by that as I am, I can tell.

So … here’s the old record and the new record.

Figure 1. HadCRUT4 and HadCRUT5 temperature records. The yellow/black and blue/black lines are lowess smooths of each dataset.

Let’s take a closer look at the changes. Here are just the lowess smooths, which give us a clear view of the underlying adjustments. I’ve added the University of Alabama Huntsville microwave sounding unit temperature of the lower troposphere (UAH MSU TLT) for comparison.

Figure 1. Lowess smooths of HadCRUT4 and HadCRUT5 surface temperature records, and the UAH MSU satellite lower troposphere temperature record. The yellow/black, blue/black, and orange/black lines are lowess smooths of each dataset. The red/black line shows the adjustments made to the HadCRUT4 dataset.

There were a couple of surprises in this for me. Normally, the adjustments are made on the older data and reflect things like changes in the time of observations of the data, or new overlooked older records added to the dataset. In this case, on the other hand, the largest adjustments are to the most recent data …

Also, in the past adjustments have tended to reduce the drop in temperature from ~ 1942 to 1970. But these adjustments increased the drop.

Go figure.

Anyhow, that’s the latest chapter in the famous game called “Can you keep up with the temperature adjustments”. I have no big conclusions, other than that at this rate the temperature trend will double by 2050, not from CO2, but from continued endless upwards adjustments …

After I voted today (no on tax increases), the gorgeous ex-fiancee and I spent the afternoon wandering the docks down at Porto Bodega, and looking at a bunch of boats that I’m very happy that I don’t own. She and I used to fish commercially out of that marina, lots of great memories.

My best regards to all,

w.

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3c0vX6b

March 3, 2021 at 12:05PM