Russia even believes in this Climate Change BULL SHIT. At the end of the interview when the Newsman asks him: “How can this be true when most worlds scientists believe humans cause global warming, Piers is cut off just as he finishes saying: “They are on the gravy train for heavens sake”

World Climate Declaration plus all signatories in pdf

Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared. 

To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in.  This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.

There is no climate emergency

A global network of over 1200 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.

Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming

The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.

Warming is far slower than predicted

The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.

Climate policy relies on inadequate models 

Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO₂. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO₂ is beneficial.

CO₂ is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth

CO₂ is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO₂ is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO₂ in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO₂-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.

Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities

There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO₂ policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.

Epilogue

The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world*. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.

From now onward the group is going to function as “Global Climate Intelligence Group”. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.

* It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts

World Climate Declaration plus all signatories in pdf

World Climate Declaration AMBASSADORS

NOBEL LAUREATE PROFESSOR IVAR GIAEVER NORWAY/USA
PROFESSOR GUUS BERKHOUT / THE NETHERLANDS
DR. CORNELIS LE PAIR / THE NETHERLANDS
PROFESSOR REYNALD DU BERGER / FRENCH SPEAKING CANADA
BARRY BRILL / NEW ZEALAND
VIV FORBES / AUSTRALIA
PROFESSOR JEFFREY FOSS † / ENGLISH SPEAKING CANADA
JENS MORTON HANSEN / DENMARK
PROFESSOR LÁSZIÓ SZARKA / HUNGARY
PROFESSOR SEOK SOON PARK / SOUTH KOREA
PROFESSOR JAN-ERIK SOLHEIM / NORWAY
STAVROS ALEXANDRIS / GREECE
FERDINAND MEEUS / DUTCH SPEAKING BELGIUM
PROFESSOR RICHARD LINDZEN / USA
HENRI A. MASSON / FRENCH SPEAKING BELGIUM
PROFESSOR INGEMAR NORDIN / SWEDEN
JIM O’BRIEN / REPUBLIC OF IRELAND
PROFESSOR IAN PLIMER / AUSTRALIA
DOUGLAS POLLOCK / CHILE
DR. BLANCA PARGA LANDA / SPAIN
PROFESSOR ALBERTO PRESTININZI / ITALY
PROFESSOR BENOÎT RITTAUD / FRANCE
DR. THIAGO MAIA / BRAZIL
PROFESSOR FRITZ VAHRENHOLT / GERMANY
THE VISCOUNT MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY / UNITED KINGDOM
DUŠAN BIŽIĆ / CROATIA, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, SERBIA AND MONTE NEGRO

1,100 Scientists and Professionals Declare: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’

By Allan Stein 

August 26, 2022 Updated: August 31, 2022

More than 1,100 scientists and professionals worldwide have signed a World Climate Declaration (WCD) stating that there’s no climate emergency.

The independent foundation Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL)issued the one-page summary on June 27, garnering 1,152 total signatures in 15 countries as of Aug. 23.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the summary reads. “Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming.”

At the same time, “politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures,” the declaration states.

CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by emeritus professor of geophysics Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok to promote knowledge and understanding of climate change in forming climate policy.

Crok said the WCD project began in 2019 and that the power is in its message, brevity, and accessibility.

“The message is plain and clear: There is no climate emergency. Very important: This is true, even if you accept that CO2 is the main driver of the current climate change,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

“We simply state that all evidence so far indicates that the increase in CO2 and the increase in temperature [are] not harmful for us or for nature and therefore the climate hysteria surrounding the topic is totally unjustified [and] that the ‘cure’—getting rid of fossil fuels asap and replacing them with renewables—probably will be worse than the ‘disease’ [climate change].”

Crok said the CLINTEL document has produced significant pushback from climate activists.

He said the organization sent many open letters to organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N., and the World Economic Forum asking for a high-level meeting with CLINTEL scientists.

“We normally don’t even get a polite reply,” Crok said. “Activists don’t like our WCD for the simple reason that they always claim there is a 97 percent or 99 percent or 99.9 percent consensus.

“So, they have two general ways to attack the WCD. They say that only a few [signatories] are active climate scientists and many are retired. Both are true and very understandable.”

He said if a working climate scientist dependent on government money signs the WCD, they face the risk of getting fired.

“We have some brave enough to speak out nevertheless, but that means you will have to face a lot of criticism and attempts to discredit you,” Crok said.

Direct engagements with the activists are rare, he said.

“They simply dominate the media, and if they feel our WCD has some impact, they will arrange that it gets discredited in the media and the social media.”

In recent weeks, CLINTEL has received increased attention and new signatories, many of whom have worked in academia.

The WCD states that the science of climate change is far from settled and that the geological archive shows Earth’s climate has been in flux for as long as the planet has existed.

“Therefore, it is no surprise that we are now expe­riencing a period of warming. Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming. The world has warmed significantly less than predicted [based on] modeled anthropogenic forcing,” it reads. “The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.”

The WCD also states that climate models have “many shortcomings” and are unsatisfactory policy tools.

“They do not only exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases, [but] they also ignore that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial,” it reads. “CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet.

“Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.”

The Texas-based company Navigator Heartland Greenway recently announced plans to build a carbon capture network across five states in the U.S. Midwest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The company held public meetings on potential land takings to make way for the project earlier this year.

The proposed Heartland Greenway pipeline would span 1,300 miles across South Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois to nearly 20 recipient points. CO2 would be converted into liquid form and buried underground.

“CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth,” the declaration reads. “There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts, and suchlike natural disasters or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2­ mitigation measures are as damag­ing as they are costly.

“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”

The declaration states to European leaders that climate policy should “respect scientific and economic realities.”

“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in,” the WCD reads. “This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central.

“Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”

Crok said the document’s main goal is to make clear that even if you accept most of the claims of the IPCC, you can still conclude there’s no climate emergency.

“In this respect, our WCD should be uncontroversial,” he said.