December 14, 2012 by CFACT Ed, 18 Comments Tweet Tweet Lord Monckton on Canada’s Sun TV recounts the reaction he received when he took the floor of the UN climate conference in Qatar to explain that the world has not warmed for 16 years. CategoriesVideosTagsClimateclimate scienceCOP 18Global WarmingipccLord MoncktonUNUNFCCC About the Author: CFACT Ed 500 police bust Deutsche Bank over €300 million carbon trading scam All Posts The Political Market Related Posts 18 annual climate gabfests: 16 years without warming Environmentalist power trips harm poor countries No one told the UN conference that there’s been no warming for 16 years UN delegate knows it’s warming, because it’s colder: Watch now! Icarus62 Monckton is an embarrassment to my country (the UK). We have accelerating global warming, record Arctic sea ice melt, accelerating global sea level rise, accelerating Greenland and Antarctic ice mass loss, shifting climate zones, increasing heatwaves and many other physical and biological signs of growing climate chaos.. but Monckton wants to pretend that none of it is happening, and that we can all keep polluting the Earth without consequences. It’s irresponsible, immoral and self-destructive. Why does he do it? Does anyone know? Eckenhuijsen Smit In CFACT 14-12-2012: Icarus62 As an unanimous commenter you must be afraid to use your worldly name. Right you are as hardly more stupid can anyone be. I´ve read many “comments” written by you and thus I thought: this must be an Ignorant Idiot (I I) That is exactly what I´ll call the unanimous writer Icarus62! You obviously have very little, if any, common sense or knowledge. As it is even known to children in prep school that CO2 is taken up by everything green, living on this planet, transforming CO2 into “building” material for all matter existing on earth and to O2 that even you (I I) inhale! CO2 is indispensable for all life on earth to keep it functioning as it did in eons past! Manmade CO2 is only 0,001152% of the earth atmosphere, so it is absolutely impossible that such nil % could influence anything like global climate change. That means: no sea level rise, no melting of gletschers or pole caps, no global warming, no natural disasters, etc. caused by CO2, as proved by scientific measurements on land, at sea and from satellites. All fizzy drinks are made fizzy with CO2! All humans and many other animals exhale CO2; even you (I I)! Apart from all convincing reasons mentioned above, that no climate change is taking place, other than the climate change that has been going on since the shaping of our globe, the most convincing scientific reason is that the sun and cosmic rays are for at least 95% cause of any climate change; not CO2! As “man” ‒luckily‒ has no influence on our sun nor on cosmic rays, “man” can do nothing to change the global climate. The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the more food can be produced for the hungry! So please stop your stupid writing. If Mr. Christopher Monckton is an embarrassment to you, what must you then be to the world opinion when in due time your opinion ‒and that of millions of people mislead during more than 30 years by the likes of Al Gore, IPCC´s Pachauri, stupid politicians and other criminals‒ is generally proven the most stupid one can think of. I will send this exposé to all my contacts around the world to show that we still have a lot of work to do to get (I Í)s like you to realise how little many people still know of the reality of our globe. Icarus62 The evidence proves that human activity is now the dominant influence on global climate. The properties of greenhouse gases are a measured fact, proven by experiment 150 years ago. The impact of human activity on the composition of the atmosphere, and hence the climate, was quantitatively predicted over 100 years ago and is now being validated by observations of a rapidly warming world. It’s impossible to deny this effect without also denying that the ice ages took place, and that the ice-free hothouse world of the dinosaurs gradually gave way to today’s climate of ice sheets and mountain glaciers as a result of declining atmospheric CO₂. The world we see in the palaeoclimate record is one with a delicately balanced global climate, very sensitive to the hundreds of billions of tons of greenhouse gases we’ve pumped into the atmosphere in the last 250 years. There are no valid scientific arguments against AGW – even the most ardent ‘skeptics’ acknowledge that we are heating up the planet, as that’s a straightforward matter of undeniable radiative physics. They only dispute the magnitude of the feedbacks which act to amplify anthropogenic warming… but they can only do that by arguing that the world has a much more stable climate than is evident from the palaeoclimate record or indeed modern observations. I wish they were right, but they’re not. It’s clear from numerous studies that all of the global warming of the last half century is anthropogenic, and that we are causing increasingly dangerous climate changes. The task of bringing global warming to a halt, after 30 years of warnings and inaction, is quite possibly beyond us now. The outlook is not good at all. Eckenhuijsen Smit (I I) writes: “even the most ardent ‘skeptics’ acknowledge that we are heating up the planet”. That is a very big lie, as I and tens of thousands of prominent scientists, being “most ardent skeptics”, from all over the world (not the lying, falsifying and cheating IPCC non-scientists) frequently proclaim that there is no manmade global warming nor climate change. You quote “numerous studies” as your source of the nonsense you write all the time, so I ask you: do you ever read any scientific negations of all the twaddly misinformation you only repeat parrotlike? Anyhow you should read: ttp://www.cfact.org/pdf/ClimateDepot-ExtremeWeatherReport2012.pdf. I can give you dozens more of internet sites where you could get the scientific information you obviously need to uplift your knowledge to discuss the worldwide destruction of our globe by the likes of uninformed people as Barack Obama, Dutch, British and many other politicians, although some politicians are getting wise and don´t want to get involved in the stupidities you so ardently keep repeating. Icarus62 The Earth’s atmosphere has a greenhouse effect of around 155W/m². By increasing the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, we have enhanced the greenhouse effect, causing a planetary energy imbalance. The Earth obviously must warm until equilibrium is restored. Agreed? Eckenhuijsen Smit (I I) Not agreed. You only try to seem intellectually right, while it holds no proof whatsoever of the nonsense you are exhibiting. Obviously you want to stay uninformed, so I end this discussion with you. Icarus62 You don’t agree that there’s a greenhouse effect? It’s not really debatable – the Earth only receives 240W/m² of insolation but radiates 395W/m² from the surface. That difference is the greenhouse effect, by definition. You can bail out of the discussion but it only shows that you don’t have a leg to stand on. CFACT Ed And yet, the observable world does not follow the computer models. Who are you going to believe, a grant-dependent computer modeler whose income depends on predicting warming, or your lying eyes? Squarzelfitz Yagoslavovich Icarus, if you fly close to the sun you can see the greenhouse effect. Let me make this clear: there is a greenhouse effect. Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas. There is no significant scientific evidence linking co2 and global climate. Icarus62 “It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide. The most important of these over the long term is CO2, whose concentration in the atmosphere is rising principally as a result of fossil-fuel combustion and deforestation.” An Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html Squarzelfitz Yagoslavovich Show me that proof please Icarus62 IPCC AR5, or try reading some of Hansen’s papers – they’re very accessible. SwedishWinterIsCold Icarus62 – Perhaps you are a little bit of an embarrassment… Where is the Antarctic ice loss? It is growing – do some research. The Glaciers in the Himalayas – some of them are growing… How could all this be happening with your so-called Global warming? Of course some ice is shrinking, as some is growing…The Earth is under constant flux…If you listened to Lord Monckton – you may answer some of your questions…I think he does it simply because he finds the official line a crock of lies, and does not want to see the Planet ruled by Evil lying blood sucking psychopaths (ie UN, EU, WHO, WTO, etc). …And why do you agree with the official line – if it is the same ‘officials’ that have got us into this mess? Yes we need to stop polluting – but that is entirely a different matter – and these Kyoto treaties hardly touch on the rape of the trees, the oceans, the forests…And how we could use Hemp to replace ALL plastics ALL papers ALL fuels… (As we used to before it was made illegal)… Perhaps you should do some more research before you embarrass yourself further… Icarus62 The funny thing is, this site is supposedly about a ‘Constructive Tomorrow’, but denying overwhelming evidence for AGW is not constructive. CFACT Ed If the evidence was overwhelming, there would be no need for propaganda, cover up and suppression of dissent. Icarus62 I’m sure you don’t believe those things have happened, any more than I do. Instead of trying to deny the reality of AGW, why not look for solutions which will work *and* achieve the kind of ‘constructive tomorrow’ that you claim to want? We have to sequester hundreds of billions of tons of CO2 from the atmosphere if we’re to have any chance of halting global warming (and this is true *regardless* of whether you believe we’re causing the warming or not – it’s straightforward physics). Find a practical and economical way to do that, and you’ll be doing everyone a huge favour. CFACT Ed http://www.climatedepot.com/ Documented every day. J.P. Katigbak I hope climatedepot.com would be updated, to help challenge the ideological and philosophical doctrine of environmentalism. Always keep it up, CFACT. – J.P.K.