They are successfully creating a story that is unifying the conservative message on a range of issues, I am referring to the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship that will be meeting in London this week. They include so many influential politicians even Mike Johnson the 56th Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Donald Trump mentioned him by name second, or was it third, in his inaugural address on becoming President. Johnson is on the advisory board of ARC and spoke at the first ARC conference in London in November 2023. I was there.
They claim to be working to “re-laying the foundations of our civilisation”, but there will be no mention of science.
The conference will be in London the home of the Royal Society, that has more recently been captured by much that is fashionable. And fashion is of course the lowest form of ideology. Founded on 28 November 1660, the Royal was granted a royal charter by King Charles II and is the oldest continuously existing scientific academy in the world.
Then there is the British Museum of Natural History, also in London. This, and so many other science institutions, including Australia’s science agency the CSIRO, now take their lead from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The IPCC sits under the United Nations. It was established under the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), ostensibly with the aim of measuring the impact from humankind on the Earth’s climate, to the extent that the FCCC have instructed the IPCC to only consider the human component of climate change. For simplicity, this would mean that if there was for example 100 mechanisms of action and interaction driving changes in climate, and the category of human action was one of those mechanisms, the FCCC has instructed the IPCC they are only allowed to talk about that one mechanism and must ignore the other 99. This kind of myopic directive is how you get nonsense claims like the one on the front page of the CSIRO website that “90% of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide are from the burning of fossil fuels”.
What they might mean is that 90% of human emissions are from fossil fuels, but the way it is written most people would assume that 90% of the carbon in the atmosphere is from us – you and me, our cars, factories and plastic bags. That is a nonsense! When all the natural sources are considered, emissions from combustion of oil, gas and coal are a small percentage and impossible to separate from other plant sources including all the carbon dioxide breathed out by forests and phytoplankton, not to mention forest fires. Carbon dioxide is in deed a well mixed gas, and very soluble in the ocean.
Meanwhile, at the conference this week, in London, ARC will likely also continue to promote the policies of one of the darlings of the heterodox climate consensus community, political scientist Bjorn Lomborg.
Lomborg will likely tell the delegates that global warming is real, human caused, but he will say, it is just not an emergency. It will speak nonsense and he will be applauded by all the conservatives and the hangers-on. He will tell them what is fashionable or what could be fashionable never mind the facts.
Lomborg and one of his funders, Bill Gates, now see an advantage in an energy transition to nuclear. That was something Margaret Thatcher first spruiked back in the 1980s, only to be told by Nigel Lawson that nuclear could only be competitive with North Sea gas etcetera if there was government intervention, subsidies, and on it goes.
When I attended the first ARC conference, I was dismayed by all that I heard, especially the penultimate closing address that was by Lomborg. As well as assuring us that carbon dioxide was responsible for climate change, he mentioned the advantages of vaccines. Almost in the same breath, and without context, certainly without acknowledging the role of big pharma in the Covid fiasco of mandates and adverse events denied at the time and at the first ARC conference, and it is not on the agenda for discussion this week.
At the conference this week a book will be launched, ostensibly bringing together the sharpest minds of our times in history, economics, philosophy, as well as artists and statesmen. So, their story goes. There is no mention of science or women. There is mention of this new book uncovering the best that our civilization has given us, but again no mention of science.
I put some effort into a series of blog posts when I attended ARC in 2023. I explained how I was dismayed at how many conservative Australian politicians were there, all agreeing vigorously with everything that was said that did not include any discussion of the direction of science that has been critical to western civilization.
There is ARC Research that claims to be a not for profit company which exists to renew social fabric, develop a pro-human vision of energy, business, and governance, and ultimately, tell a better story for our future. But how can any organisation undertake research if it does understand the fundamental principles of evidence and method. If it will use words as the IPCC does to quarantine discussion to a minuscule component of the natural world, of the natural order of things.
For sure science has been abandoned by today’s conservatives, who are on the political ascent, and this should be of concern to us all.
My blog posts from November 2023 with a focus on climate are here:
Reconciling with Nature, God and Qantas, Part 1, https://jennifermarohasy.com/2023/10/reconciling-with-nature-god-and-qantas-part-1-arriving-london/
In Denial about the Science, ARC Part 2, https://jennifermarohasy.com/2023/11/04/
The second half of Part 3 gives something of an overview of who attended and what they said, once you get past my short history of how the Thames and Europe used to freeze over, https://jennifermarohasy.com/2023/11/political-and-natural-hazards-arc-part-3/
In Part 4 ( https://jennifermarohasy.com/2023/12/2024-carbon-dioxide-warming-part1/ , that I wrote from Seattle, I included comment that:
“ … at the ARC conference in London, there was this assumption that everyone knows carbon dioxide causes warming of the Earth and the oceans and that as atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide rise we risk even more warming, but no-one was prepared to engage in any detail or explain the physical mechanisms. Certainly, no-one wanted to explain to me how the spike that was occurring in global temperatures while I was in London, how it had been caused by carbon dioxide.”
I wrote back in December 2023 in my final blog post about ARC, that I wanted to begin some discussion about the science, about carbon dioxide and climate change. It has taken me some time to get going, and I thank you for your patience.
It was a year later, in December 2024 that I interviewed Bill Kininmonth, and next Tuesday I will be interviewing Ivan Kennedy – a professor at Sydney University.
We will be discussing both the surprising history of how it is that carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa has come to define global trends, and the chemistry of carbon, it being so soluble in seawater. Kennedy is quite the expert when it comes to carbon chemistry, especially issues of acidification and calcification.
It is likely that we will hypothesise that what is being measured at Mauna Loa is almost certainly degassing from the ocean, I am going to suggest from the equatorial Pacific Ocean, rather than emission from the combustion of coal, gas or oil – and certainly not uneven respiration from northern hemisphere forests that is so often proposed to explain seasonal trends in carbon dioxide concentrations at Moana Loa.
If you are so inclined to come down this rabbit hole with us, you will need to register for what will be my first Zoom webinar!
When: Feb 25, 2025 12:00 PM Brisbane
Topic: Oceans Breathe Out Carbon Dioxide. Part 2/Towards a New Theory of Climate Change
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_NfQkdaPZR46zfrKSxrKTBQ
After registering, you should receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.
Part 2 follows on from Part 1, that was my discussion with Bill Kininmonth about convection and how the tropical oceans don’t overheat because of the hot towers/the massive anvil cumulonimbus clouds that transport energy from the bottom to the top of the troposphere at the equator. There is a summary of this meeting, also as a blog post, https://jennifermarohasy.com/2024/12/oceans-warm-atmosphere-with-meteorologist-william-kininmonth-audio-and-summaries/
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
From the CSIRO website.
“Fossil fuel CO2 includes emissions from the combustion and use of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) and cement production. These emissions account for about 90 per cent of all CO2 emissions from human activities.”
I like you Jennifer, find it hard to understand why these people will not look at the science and I wonder if it would destroy their narrative if they were to do so, none more than Bjorn Lomborg.
Will Happer and Richard Lindberg have effectively destroyed the CO2 causes Global Warming narrative, and Bjorn has built a career on saying the opposite but telling us there is no need to panic.
The one hope we have is that President Trump will make good on the commitment given to Will Happer that he will run a Red Team Blue Team examination of the scientific facts and not the rhetoric and then the truth will come out.
Well done. Meanwhile, it’s still the same old conservative establishment world view that occupies the so-called intellectual space , like a half eaten week old sandwich they espouse their views about controlling the masses. Money speaks many languages, ideologies and interests.
The vanguard of the current Solar-induced Orbital Dry Cycle, is moving East to West at 15 degrees Longitude per 30 Day/Night Interval Month around the planet – and will reach the South Pacific Ocean, (75 degrees East Longitude) circa mid-March, 2025.
Africa and Europe are now completely under the canopy of this severe Dry Cycle and the Americas will follow suit.
The ‘mechanics’ of this impending temperature rise over the Pacific Ocean and subsequent reduction in precipitation over land masses under the Dry Cycle Canopy, have nothing to do with ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’, or CO2.
Explaining the Temperature/Precipitation Paradox, influencing the Dry Cycle Terrestrial Footprint.
As the Dry Cycles circle the planet, surface temperatures under the Dry Cycle ‘canopy’, are elevated by the destruction of water vapor Albedo (reflectivity,) via the interaction of charged Solar Particles expelled from the Sun.
If the Dry Cycle is passing over what is predominately a land-mass – enhanced evaporation and subsequent Drought Conditions are likely to ensue, (without mitigating circumstances, such as associated volcanic activity.)
However, as the Dry Cycle passes over significant bodies of water,(Oceans/Seas/Lakes,) the increased surface temperature exacerbates evaporation from these sources, which may result in severe localized precipitation events (storms) over these bodies of water, or nearby land masses – depending on prevailing weather conditions, (such as pressure gradient movement and wind direction.)
Thus, there is a destruction of water vapor in the upper atmosphere, at the same time as there is an increase of evaporation from the surface. Overall however, the prospect of precipitation,(whether over land or water,) is lessened under the influence of an orbiting Dry Cycle.
The confrontational ‘interface’ between the Westward moving vanguard of the Dry Cycle, associated with the Eastward and towards the Poles movement (Axial Spin) of the ‘default’ Wet/Normal weather patterns that are being ‘overtaken’, is manifest in a seemingly ‘compressed’ precipitation regime immediately to the West of the ‘vanguard longitude’.
‘Extract from ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ thirty years on….’ (p 271)
TW– Part 1
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VI_-2FuVXgUuObpBusFQP1j87Sc3xDJz/view?usp=sharing
TW– Part 2
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Nea7N5AiVoklvg9gGA1b3932Uq0-4qPK/view?usp=sharing
TW – Part 3
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UqxyNzLq14Jv7-kf6ZKHDOdmjgfst9zp/view?usp=sharing
TW – Part 4
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qsbYVDYzzGFOOAfE5-cuuOlLPW8Pg3Df/view?usp=sharing
Hi Jennifer. I spend a lot of time interacting with the msm which is the dominant driving force behind AGW. Their knowledge of AGW is abysmal and anything even remotely complicated gets short shrift from them and they default to some current alarmist position such as the hottest year ever. I’m always looking for the simplest argument possible against AGW which can satisfy the limited attention span of the msm and give them a satisfactory talking point. One of my favourites is the tiny % of human CO2, ~3%, going into the atmosphere each year compared to natural CO2, 97%. This argument has the authority of the IPCC via Figure 7.3 from AR4:
https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-7-3.html
Some of the msm are now regurgitating the egregious counter argument that natural emissions of CO2 were in balance with the sinks of CO2 before human emissions came along. My counter counter argument to this specious nonsense is that nature is NEVER in balance because if it were we would not have weather, seasons or climate.
What do you think is the best, most simple and resonating argument against AGW.
Cohenite, here’s some resonating talking points for you…
https://www.earthday.org/6-arguments-to-refute-your-climate-denying-relatives/
Nature…The international journal of science / 13 February 2025
“Actionable implications
Acknowledging the need for Geological Net Zero makes clear what it takes for any continued fossil fuel use to be consistent with Paris Agreement goals. Offsetting emissions with enhanced CO 2 uptake in the oceans and biosphere can provide immediate benefits30 if and only if it is genuinely additional to passive CO 2 uptake. In a durable net-zero world, 100% of the CO2 generated by any continued fossil fuel or fossil carbonate use will almost certainly need to be either captured at source or recaptured from the atmosphere and committed to geological-timescale storage. A commitment from high-ambition participants to report and scale up this ‘geologically stored fraction’92is needed urgently: it is currently about 0.1% globally 93, even including CO 2 injection for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery, and accelerates smoothly over time to reach 100% at the date of Geological Net Zero in cost-effective scenarios that meet the goals of the Paris Agreement 92,94. This implies, in addition to reducing emissions, achieving a 10% geo-logically stored fraction by the mid-2030s95 and investing now for a further 10-fold increase in the stored fraction over the following 20 years, including demonstrating secure and verifiable geological CO2 storage capacity to match any new fossil fuel reserves. These are ambitious but achievable goals for the fossil fuel industry and its customers.”
I don’t care karen. I’ve refuted that gibberish for a decade. Take the first rubbish point of your 6 refutations; that is, the climate today is changing 50-100 times faster than any time in history. This is beyond BS and is certifiable. Go and google, if you can, Heinrich and Dansgaard-Oeschger events. Dansgaard-Oeschger events for instance were rapid warming events which featured global temperature increases of up to 15C in 10 years.
Karen the yarn about heat related deaths is hotly debated.
‘The number of people who died in the United States from cold weather-related causes more than doubled between 1999 and 2022, according to an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Thursday, and scientists say increasing extreme winter weather events due to climate change could be to blame.’ (Forbes)
I have a basement apartment in my house that is climate-controlled via a heat-pump system. I stood in front of the exterior unit for a few seconds recently. (It was as long as I could bear.) It was like being in a very intense Arctic blast!
All of these systems blasting out Arctic air in the winter time and adding plenty of heat to the atmosphere on hot summer days…
I bet that could have way more of an effect on ‘climate’ than a trace amount of CO2.
Meanwhile, here in New England, I am so sick of the snow and the cold and the shoveling this winter. I loved last year’s mild winter! I enjoyed hiking all winter long. Bring it back! (I’m done with downhill skiing, now that the ski areas price tickets the same way the airlines do. A same-day ticket is likely to bankrupt the average person.)
‘ … give them a satisfactory talking point.’
Perhaps the only way to get the MSM to listen is when Donald tells them that CO2 doesn’t cause global warming. Happer is on board to advise the President.
In the meantime, I tell them that the recent spike in world temperature is down to a lot more water vapour in the stratosphere, caused by the Hunga Tonga eruption.
They scoff at that, even when I mention that NASA accepts H2O in the stratosphere traps heat like a greenhouse gas (sic). They are bamboozled and change the subject.
Karen, considering North America weather right now I think a quote from question 3 is of interest.
‘ … as the cold becomes rarer, it will feel more intense and hit unexpecting places. For example, in February of 2021, Texas got hit with an unprecedented winter storm that shut down their electricity supply for multiple days and froze the ground for more than 8 days.’
Clearly this cold air outbreak is in the same category and has the characteristics of global cooling.
Ironicman, weather and climate are not the same.
That is true, 30 years is the standard and here we see it playing out.
https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_January_2025_v6.1_20x9-scaled.jpg
Clear evidence that its been warming, but no substantial proof that CO2 has any part to play. They had an expression, the ‘precautionary principle’, which became the foundation stone for a cult following and exonerated politicians from liability.
History will not be kind to the scientists who jumped on the gravy train just to get a grant.
Cosmic forces and oceanic oscillations are the main drivers of climate, the Eemian Interglacial was a time before humanity.
‘Here we present a near annual resolution reconstruction of climate developed from a speleothem that spans the Eemian from 117,500 to 123,500 years BP—the most recent period in the Earth’s history when temperatures were similar to those of today.
There is clear ‘indication of solar and teleconnection cyclic forcing of Eemian climate in southeast Australia, a region at present often affected by severe drought and bushfires.
‘We find evidence for multi-centennial dry periods interpreted as mega-droughts, and highlight the importance of understanding the causes of these in the context of a rapidly warming world, where temperatures are now, or projected to exceed those of the Eemian.’ (McGowan et al 2020)
“Should such prolonged periods of drier conditions occur again, then they may be reinforced by anthropogenic global warming, thereby increasing their severity.”
(McGowan etal., 2020)
No shout out for the closure of the Whyalla Steel Mills Karen just think of the CO2 it puts out every day. But don’t worry we will waste more billions of dollars on Green Hydrogen. It has never and will never work but what the hell it is only taxpayers money not theirs.