Delingpole: ‘Climate Emergency Is Real’ Warns ‘Professor Micky Mouse’ and 11,000 Other ‘Scientists’
By Paul Homewood
Dellers on that letter from 11000 “scientists”:
The world faces ‘untold suffering due to the climate crisis’, 11,000 scientists have warned in a statement published by the journal BioScience.
“We declare clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency”
Unfortunately for the statement’s credibility, among the signatories is one “Mouse, Micky [sic], Professor, at the Micky Mouse Institute for the Blind, Namibia.”
In the statement published by the journal BioScience, the scientists claim:
“We declare clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency…An immense increase of scale in endeavors to conserve our biosphere is needed to avoid untold suffering due to the climate crisis….The climate crisis is closely linked to excessive consumption of the wealthy lifestyle…To secure a sustainable future, we must change how we live…”
But while the statement has received generous coverage from the usual gullible hysterics at CBS, ABC News, CNN and the Guardian others have responded with scepticism and mockery.
Some have noted that very few of those 11,000 signatories are directly involved in climate science. They work in fields ranging from ‘family physician’, ‘vertebrate palaeontology’, ‘nano optics’ ‘economics’ to ‘civil engineering’ and ‘retired science teacher, inspector and adviser, Warwickshire County Council’. The impression given is of a vast parasite industry – the Climate Industrial Complex – with a strong vested interest in promoting the “climate emergency” but with little personal understanding of the field themselves
Full story here.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Reblogged this on ECO-ENERGY DATABASE.
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Hmmm, what a shame that the list of signatories is inexplicably unavailable –
“Signatures unavailable
Viewing signatures is currently unavailable. We are working on the issue.”
https://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/signatures-unavailable
Ive copied a PDF file of the names but dont know how to paste a PDF here. If anyone needs the file I’ll send it to you. Yes, most appear to be biologists and gardeners of little merit.
“To secure a sustainable future, we must change how we live…”
Not to worry, when the oil industry shuts down to “urgently” reduce carbon emissions to net-zero (no more gasoline or diesel fuel), those lives will be in even greater danger with no way to travel across oceans or continents…much less attend another climate conference. Amazing case of climate-change myopia. And Green Deal stupidity.
The world faces ‘untold suffering due to the climate crisis ? Probably true as the planet cools rapidly, crops lost due to cold and snow, food prices much higher as crop yields decline, snow covers solar panels, ice covers blades in wind farms, more car accidents on ice, more skiing accidents……. We are all doomed from the cold.
That’s true. But, by a quirk of irony, rapid lowering carbon emissions to net-zero means leaving carbon in the ground. So.. there will be some left over if there are any people left over. And there is strategic storage that the climate alarmists in denial don’t know how to get rid of.
Quite amusing actually.
But the worst thing is, as the planet cools, all those climate nuts will be telling us “cutting CO2 emissions actually works. Now we must try harder!”
Oh dear.
The alarmists condemned the Oregon petition because activists infiltrated it to submit Micky Mouse etc.
Paybacks a bitch!
Joanne Nova also covers it:
http://joannenova.com.au/2019/11/doomsday-poll-shrinks-now-just-11000-metoo-scientists-say-panic-now/#comments
They should have said “The world faces untold hardship and damage to billions of people across the world if we close down all oil, gas and coal production”
Yes, and in the meantime the hardship of being bombarded by tedious climate propaganda telling us nothing useful.
The true risk from the climate emergency is the amount of money which has, is and will be wasted on attempts to solve a problem which doesn’t exist.
Yes indeed – as an outstanding example, the UK Green Party who, thank god, have a zero percent chance of getting more than 1 (or maybe 2) MPs, have “pledged” that they would spend £100 billion per year for 10 years on fighting the non-existent climate crisis/emergency/catastrophe (take your pick from the hyperbole). My main worry is that other parties will think they have to match this utter stupidity!
In the aftermath of 9/11, all transcontinental flights were banned. All over the world, surface evaporative rates went up by a whole degree – as was pointed out by Dr. Roy Spencer (a qualified climate scientist.) Now, correlation is not proof of causation, but this sudden change in evaporative rates had to be due to a cause. Jet airliners do not only dump CO2 into the atmosphere, they also dump tons of particulates into the upper atmosphere. The scattering and reflective effect of that dumping has not been included in current climate ‘models’. I would argue that the correlation is far stronger than that of the graphs proposed by the ‘Mickey Mouse’ scientific community. So, if we enter into the full program of the green agenda, it is not the rich that will suffer, but the majority of the poor. We do need to cut out waste – pollution in cities has reached crisis levels and that can be directly blamed on the over dependance on 19th C technology – suck, squeeze, bang, blow is all. Electric cars will help with that but the current electricity generating technology depends on Charles Parson’s steam turbines driving Prof. Faraday’s electrical machines – renewables cannot cope with the current base load, let alone 100 million electric cars.
As I can remember the London smogs of the 1950s and have experienced the dreadful smog in Beijing in the 1990s, I look at the dreadful air pollution in Dehli with some sympathy.
I also understand that much of the plastic and other pollution which is rightly railed against, stems from multi-national corporations producing junk products of zero economic value which in the end enrich a tiny elite. Whereas the pioneers of the first successful industrial revolution, the Stephenson’s, Brunel, Matthew Murray, Henry Maudsley, James Naismith and many others produced real measurable ‘trickle down’ of huge economic benefit, these paragons of ‘capitalism’ produce nothing of any value but to themselves. Their version of capitalism is that practised by pick-pockets working the platforms of the London Underground – while keeping a weather-eye open for the transport police…
Yes, we need to engineer change but that must be a balanced approach that spreads the load and costs evenly. There will have to be changes in employment that will enhance real productivity – not using the ‘Albert Speer’ model of shipping problems off to the third world with conditions of virtual slavery.
The technology developed over the last 150 years has the potential to produce a stable society with a stable environment – unfortunately, like the man on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho it, ‘fell amongst thieves’. I am an old fashioned capitalist that believes that money should be lashed to the wheel of real progress and its back whipped raw!
It is very odd that “Plastic” is such a big problem.
It si only because having got people to collect it together the Councils/Governments then dump it, bury it, or send it abroad to be “disposed of”.
There are 2 simple remedies to this, 1. very efficient modern Incinerators coupled to heat or electrical generation.
2. Turn it back in to Oil or Diesel Fuel. This has been shown to work and once the process is started it is self powering.
Most plastic is bio-degradeable, it always has been so, it is an organic compound after all. The environmental movement have made sure this fact was hidden for years. However, if its as they say that plastic lasts forever, we should be up to or armpits in the stuff, but we remain firmly only up to our ankles. So next the Greens invented nano-plastic a substance that cannot be detected, I am told the King’s new clothes were made of nano-plastic!
But at last a few brave scientists are publishing the truth, but I am sure the Greens will try and suppress the Truth, for the Greens are Deniers of the first order.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389419305060
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6278/1196
The secret to plastic is incineration, Reuse the hydRo carbons to produce hydro
” … multi-national corporations producing junk products of zero economic value which in the end enrich a tiny elite. ”
Actually they enrich more than the elite. They enrich all those employed in the factories where these “junk products” are made. And all those who earn money supplying the factories. And distributing the products. And marketing them. And retailing them. (Disclaimer: my mortgage is paid by a factory 🙂)
Phil, I spent most of my working life in manufacturing industry, mostly for export. And watched with horror as the political policies of the 1980s reduced that industry with high property prices, high interest rates and zero investment. The American model of ‘monopoly capitalism’ has never produced better products – which is why the Americans started the 2nd world war with no decent liquid cooled aero-engines, tanks that ran on gasoline, didn’t discover penicillin, failed to develop a viable jet engine and had to be rescued by the Tizard Mission.
As I am rudely reminded, every time I turn on my television, there is far more effort expended on sales and marketing than on improved product design. Yes, it provides well remuniated employment for the talentless otherwise unemployable, but please do not imagine that it represents technical progress – as I pointed out, productive technical progress has appeared to cease and we are stuck in a stasis reflecting the 19th century.
It was technical change that has raised millions out of the medieval poverty that existed before the industrial revolution – but a system that imagines that such a limited techology can be expanded to cover 7 billion people, is fooling both itself and the public at large. If we are to escape from this self-imposed trap, then money must be put back to work and better goals sort that are not based on ‘executive remuneration’ and ‘shareholder value’ that stokes the fires of boom and bust. Real capitalism, that of Adam Smith, with good regulation of market worst behaviour, can help spread the benefits to a larger population. Smith, who lived in an age with some of the worst market ‘scams’ imaginable, the Lousianna Purchase and the South Sea Bubble, was never in favour of unregulated speculative market behaviour!
And yet with ICE vehicles in use in London the air quality has never been better but somehow fails to meet the standards dreamt up by the World Health Organisation – a group no more trustworthy than the WMO, the UN etc. And I know this from experience having been a courier driver back in 1990 and on some summer days felt a tightness in my chest. I have worked in Westminster and the City for 10 years and have had no problems even on the hottest day evah! The graphs that Paul has produced show why.
Wonder why these experts have shown a graph of increasing Nitrous oxide (N2O) concentration. They used to moan about Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). One is toxic and the other makes you laugh.
Did you say SCIENTISTS!
To be fair, you don’t have to be a climate scientist to understand the broad overview of the global warming themes. you just need to do a bit of research and study the science and then you know, that the amount of climate change due to humans is zip. Unnoticeable.
I believe the list of signatories also included Dumbledore and someone from the Suez Canal University. According to comments at WUWT many (most?) of the signatories appear to be students — on the “sign or flunk” principle, presumably! Genuine climate scientists appear to be conspicuous by their absence
“Genuine climate scientists”
There goes Mike, waxing all oxymoronic on us.
🙂
Ezra has a debunk video
If an org has NEWS in its title that is an ambush name.
It signifies it is an agenda-pushing PR agency for its pet special interest groups.
World news media were quick to publicise the “11,000 scientists say it’s a CLIMATE EMERGENCY”
scientificviewpoint paper... but look how it falls apart.
My favourite on the list is the expert on reincarnation.
Ezra’s comment – “Climate scientist?? Ahhh close enough for the CBC.”
Hilarious.
Bolt has five minute video
Dellers article is based on Jo Nova’s piece which points out one of the Top Scientists who signed is
* “Professor Micky Mouse, Institute for Blind, Namibia ” *
..I think there are quite a few more fakes, cos the 11,000 names are taken from a petition
http://joannenova.com.au/2019/11/doomsday-poll-shrinks-now-just-11000-metoo-scientists-say-panic-now/
Watch yourself Paul that Delingpole he’s at the centre at an Axis of evil
… according to the PR trickery operation called DeSmog blog
who have NO connections at all to an entire web of shifty Global Warming alarmist orgs. /sarc
Steve Bannon has admitted he helped Johnson with his speech when he resigned from Theresa May’s cabinet. Bannon has returned to being editor of *far-right* media outlet Breitbart, known for its publication of climate science denial stories, many penned by British columnist James Delingpole. Delingpole also writes for the *Koch-backed* Spiked network, as does one of Farage’s colleagues and former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party, Brexit Party MEP for the North-West, Claire Fox. DeSmog revealed last year that the Koch brothers, who own the US’s largest private energy company and are infamous *funders* of climate science denial, fund the Spiked network.
(Giving one donation a few years ago, doesn’t count as “backed” and “funders of” in a normal person’s mind )
https://www.desmog.co.uk/2019/08/01/boris-johnson-cabinet-tufton-street-ties-map
So what, precisely, is Desmog accusing them all of?
Farage and Delingpole of communism……I don’t think so.
Claire Fox of being a filthy Capitalist…….Not on yer Nellie.
Perhaps Brendan O’Neill of being both…….Errrr….well, he laughs about being accused of being a commie by some and a capitalist by others. TBH, I quite like the bloke even if he does irritate the hell out me when he gets into socialist mode, but then he does that to the other side in Capitalist mode. Quite balanced really.
Asides from having a rather healthy scepticism of climate change, I’m not sure much unites any of them other that the ability to take a balanced view.
Which is far more than Desmog is capable of. But then it’s run by a convicted criminal.
It’s not run by a convicted criminal
he provided the seed money to start it.
“The DeSmogBlog team is especially grateful to our benefactor John Lefebvre, a lawyer, internet entrepreneur and past-president of NETeller, a firm that has been providing secure online transactions since 1999.”
John Lefebvre cut a deal with the U.S. Justice Department and was sentenced June 29, 2007 by federal Judge P. Kevin Castel in the U.S. New York Southern District Court to 45 days imprisonment, one year of supervised release, and fined $750,000.
The site was founded by a PR professional and it is essentially a smear site.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2011/04/truth-about-desmogblog.html?m=1
As ever when libmob throw out accusations they are usually projecting themselves.
Stew
I know desmog, when I referred to a criminal running it I was adopting the tactics of the alarmists. Smear everything with anything you can get no matter how convoluted. 🙂
Isn’t Mr. Delingpole a friend of a Mr. Marc Morano, described as “evil personified”, (to the huge delight of the latter gentleman), by those of the bedwetter persuasion?
Matt McGarth covered the issue for the BBC. Seems to have re-written the press release.
Made the front page on the BBC website.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50302392
Note that the article is open access and quite short. It is a good summary of the major evidence underpinning a climate emergency.
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/biz088/5610806
There are two sets of graphs.
The first shows “Change in global human activities from 1979 to the present. These indicators are linked at least in part to climate change.”
Two of the main indicators are rising global population and must faster rising real global GDP. If you see the implied massive increase in global average living standards as a primarly a contributor to the climate problem, then I would suggest there is a problem with your moral priorities.
The second shows 14 graphs of “Climatic response time series from 1979 to the present. ” Temperature rise there, along with sea level rise and ice melt are included. There is nothing here that shows a large problem on a global scale.
@Manic I don’t see any obvious changes to the BBC article and Newsniffer hasn’t got anything after the 6th However one weird thing is when you look at reader comments
The Second most downvoted 354 Downvoted this skeptic “Do not believe you one bit BBC. Can we have the names of these 11,000 scientists and their qualifications please? When 500 scientists wrote a letter to the United Nations debunking this rubbish at least we knew who they were and their qualifications.This is about authoritarian control over the global population in a new age feudal state allowing the Super Rich to be the new aristocracy.
——————————————
The the in Top Comments the #2 and #3 both mock the skeptic
“If you read the article, you’d know it says the names of ALL of the scientists have been published online. So yes, you can.”
“And vaccines cause autism and the world is flat.
How did we let this anti-intellectualism grow to fester like this?”
Ah @Manic there was something I saw
Down the BBC page it has had from the beginning a paragraph to deal with the flakiness of the names
Even though that word “researchers” is a catchall
eg it could include a psychologist who once asked a question about Climate change
based on on Ezra’s picking out of names as theologian, family doctor, real estate agent .. the list won’t have 11,000 researchers on
And technically you shouldn’t include retired researchers.
I just checked RetractionWatch but I spot no discussion of the opinion paper or people ..Maybe there is a discussion on Facebook or elsewhere
Where does this leave the Greta generation, up the creek without a paddle?
If you enact the ” radical solutions” proposed from this lot, Greta’s generation are truly stuffed.
No children (the population must be controlled)
No food (intensive farming banned)
No transport (cars must go! not even sure about a cycle)
No Jobs or income ( capitalism is evil, personal wealth even worse)
Not sure how the lights stay on, but we will all be dead with the cold, so no matter.
Is this what we want for our Grandchildren?
By the way who the f*** are the “Worthy Garden Club” who funded this study, and why did the media not say who they are. Not sure they have any Credibility other than funding from who knows where!
The Worthy Garden Club is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Bend, Oregon. Founded in 2015, we are a collective of business owners, entrepreneurs, energy specialists, agriculturists, scientists, and astronomers working together to teach our community to respect and protect the beauty of our planet. Through ties with educational institutions and local environmental groups, we are able to participate in important natural science research and deliver those results to the public. Our mission is to showcase the wonders of the planet (and beyond) while emphasizing the need to protect this special place we call home.
I notice on the website of the Alliance of World Scientists that they have 23,000 members. Does this mean that 12,000 of their members refused to sign the document?
Just testing this BBCnews Facebook embed
Clicking the Facebook icon should get the comments to open
ah you have to click the words “251 comments” at the bottom right
PR story created –> BBC/MSM CutNpaste –> Top politics people WORLDwide retweet the BBC
eg Kevin Rudd exPM Oz (3,000 likes) , Carloline Lucas, Dale Vince
– bbc.co.uk tweets
BBCscienceNews (7,000 likes), BBCnews (multiple tweets), Greenpeace
– bbc.com tweets
But Bjorn Lomborg..was quick
Nov 5
You would imagine these 11,000 scientists at least were able to put together a coherent argument for why there is “an emergency”
They don’t — they just ramble what seems like 1970s limits-to-growth thoughts
Read the paper
It is sad
Who Get’s Hurt?
The poor around the world who don’t get the benefits of affordable, reliable energy.
This signatory cracked me up . . “arrojo, fernanda nephrologist H A Marcide Spain”
Oops! Sorry, I thought it read “phrenologist”. I’ll get my coat . . .
Alarmists will never tire of citing those things as to be taken serious resources. Another one is that all those that somehow have a real sciences background (not gender studies) work in a field that would get more funding without the global warming hoax. This means that their source of income would dry up. It does not sound like someone impartial to me. Those folks and others like Cook and his 97% should be on a pillory where everyone can spit on them for the frauds they are. Deliver proof or shut it …