Author: Guest Author

Why the Right should espouse climate-realism

By Grégoire Canlorbe, Vice President of the Parti National-Libéral

[Update:  December 2021. Since many years, already, Grégoire Canlorbe is now totally retired from politics and no longer has any responsibility in any political party. His ideas also have much evolved since this article, which he doesn’t endorse anymore.]

[This article, which originally appeared on Wattsupwiththat.com on 20 July 2018, is being published with the permission of the author. Ed.]

“The agreement of the Paris COP 21 was not signed to save the planet and to prevent us from roasting due to an imaginary temperature increase of +2°C. Behind all that masquerade is hidden, as always, the ugly face of power, greed, and profit. All the industrialists who are in favor of that commitment, which will ruin Europe and immensely impoverish its citizens, do so for the good reason they find in it a huge and easy source of income. As for NGOs, when they are not simply motivated by greed, their motive consists in a resolutely Malthusian ideology. Their object is to return the world to a very small population, on the order of a few hundred million people. To do so, they impoverish the world, remove the power of fossil fuel energies, and thus ensure that the number of deaths increases.”

Professor István Markó (1956 – 2017)

The eminent Davos man that is Emmanuel Macron does not only profess his faith in cosmopolitanism—namely, the refusal of sovereign Continue reading “Why the Right should espouse climate-realism”

Thirty Years On, How Well Do Global Warming Predictions Stand Up?

James Hansen issued dire warnings in the summer of 1988. Today earth is only modestly warmer

By
Pat Michaels and Ryan Maue

[This article1 originally appeared with the same title in the Wall Street Journal on 21 June 2018.  Ed]

James Hansen testifies before a Senate Transportation subcommittee in Washington, D.C., May 8, 1989. PHOTO: DENNIS COOK/ASSOCIATED PRESS

James E. Hansen wiped sweat from his brow. Outside it was a record-high 98 degrees on June 23, 1988, as the NASA scientist testified beforethe Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources during a prolonged heat wave, which he decided to cast as a climate event of cosmic significance. He expressed to the senators his “high degree of confidence” in “a cause-and-effect relationship between the greenhouse effect and observed warming.”

With that testimony and an accompanying paper in the Journal of Continue reading “Thirty Years On, How Well Do Global Warming Predictions Stand Up?”

A conversation with Prof. Richard Lindzen

[This interview is being published here with the permission of the author.  It was also published by Wattsupwiththat.com on 18 June 2018. Ed.]

Guest interview by Grégoire Canlorbe

Richard Siegmund Lindzen is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. From 1983 until his retirement in 2013, he was Alfred P. Sloan

The Eiffel Tower on the Champ de Mars in Paris, France.

Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was a lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change. He has criticized the scientific consensus about climate change and what he has called “climate alarmism.”

 

A short while ago, Prof. Lindzen had a conversation with Mr. Grégoire Canlorbe, who interviewed him on behalf on the French Association des climato-réalistes—the only climate-realist organization in France. Continue reading “A conversation with Prof. Richard Lindzen”

Science, Philosophy and Inquiry on a Galactic Scale: A conversation with Dr. Willie Soon

[This is a reprint of a blog from the Friends of Science web site by Grégoire Canlorbe.  This post originally appeared on Friends of Science and also on Grégoire Canlorbe’s site.  We are reprinting it with the permission of Dr. Willie Soon and the author, Grégoire Canlorbe.  ed]

April 12, 2018

Contributed by Grégoire Canlorbe © 2017     These are the opinions of the author and interviewee. Updated with additional citations/links April 12, 2018 at 11:14 AM MST.

  • Dr. Willie Soon is an independent solar physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who has been studying the Sun and its influence on the Earth’s climate for more than a quarter of a century. A short while ago, he had a conversation with Mr. Grégoire Canlorbe, an independent journalist who is also vice president of the French Parti National-Libéral (“National-Liberal Party,” conservative, nationalist, and free-marketist). Here Dr. Soon speaks for himself.

http://blog.friendsofscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/A-dr-willie-soon-Gc-article-1-300x300.png
Canlorbe: You say polar bears are far less endangered by global warming than by environmentalists dreading ice melt. Could you expand?

Dr. Soon: Yes, indeed. I have argued that too much ice will be the ultimate enemy for polar bears. Polar bears need less sea ice to be well fed and to reproduce. Why? Think about this for a minute: Polar bears eat a lot. Any large colony will need a great deal of food. The bears’ Continue reading “Science, Philosophy and Inquiry on a Galactic Scale: A conversation with Dr. Willie Soon”

Climate F-Words

by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

[Ed.  Dr. Roy Spencer wrote a post (22 March 2018) disagreeing with Lord Monckton’s theory that climate scientists have over-estimated feedback by a factor of 2, because they have been using the feedback  equations incorrectly.  Dr. Spencer agrees with the factor of 2 error, but he disagrees with the reason given by Lord Monckton.  In response, Lord Monckton has countered Dr. Spencer’s argument with a post of his own on Spencer’s blog.  The original Spencer post can be found here with Lord Monckton’s counter argument  here.]

A recent article by Lord Christopher Monckton over at WUWT argues that there has been an “elementary error of physics” that has led to climate sensitivity being overestimated by about a factor of 2.

I agree with the conclusion but not the reason why. It is already known from the work of Otto et ahttp://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Trump-forcing-and-feedback-550x309.jpgl. (2013), Lewis & Curry (2015) and others that the climate system (including the deep oceans) has warmed by an amount that suggests a climate sensitivity only about half of what the models produce (AR5 models warm by an average of 3.4 deg. C in response to a doubling of CO2).

But the potential reasons why are many, and as far as I can tell not dependent upon Christopher’s arguments. For those who don’t know, Lord Monckton is a pretty talented mathematician. However, like others I have encountered over the years, I believe he errs in his assumptions about how the climate research community uses — and does or does not depend upon — the concept of feedback in climate modeling. Continue reading “Climate F-Words”