Skip to content

How Boris Was Conned By The Met Office

February 3, 2022

By Paul Homewood

 

image

A slide show that Prime Minister Boris Johnson says helped convince him on climate change has been revealed for the first time.

The slides used to "teach" him about climate science have been released after a Freedom of Information request by UK climate website Carbon Brief.

While Mr Johnson has urged action on climate change, he previously, as a journalist, expressed scepticism.

He called the presentation, given just after he took office, "very important".

The "teach in", as it was described in email correspondence, took place in the Cabinet Room of Number 10 Downing Street on 28 January 2020.

It was organised by the office of Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser.

The briefing consisted of 11 slides showing key aspects of climate science and its impacts and the presentation was led by Prof Stephen Belcher, the chief scientist at the Met Office.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60203674

These are the slides, with my comments below:

 

SLIDE 1

COMMENT

It is immediately apparent that global temperature rise began around 1900, long before emissions began their rapid rise. There was also a period from 1940 to 1980, when temperatures fell, despite rising emissions. This should be enough to prove that CO2 is not the only factor.

There is no mention at all of the Little Ice Age, the coldest era since the ice age, or discussion of how much of the 20th warming may be a natural recovery from that.

The graph on sea levels is perhaps one of the most dishonest ones, as it begins in 1993, giving the impression that sea level rise is some sort of modern phenomenon.

Why did not Belcher show the PM this chart, confirming that sea levels have been rising since the mid 19thC, with no acceleration? This is the strongest evidence that CO2 is not a major factor in global warming:

image

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/jevrejevaetal2013gpchange.pdf

 

 

 

SLIDE 2

COMMENT

What an utter load of nonsense Johnson was subjected to by the climate “experts.” Using climate models to “simulate” what global temperature would have been without human influence is pure speculation.

Models are not “evidence”. And where are the charts which illustrate how computer modelled projections of warming are consistently much greater than observed?

SLIDE 3

As even the Met Office graph clearly shows, Arctic sea ice extent has actually been stable since 2007. This makes a total nonsense of the ridiculous headline “A tipping point”.

SLIDE 4

They show a rising trend in hot days, but why is there no chart showing the fall in cold days? When the latter are factored in, there are not “more extremes” now.

As for rainfall, it is generally accepted that a warmer world is also wetter, which in most regions would be regarded as a very good thing. A closer look at the map brings this into focus:

image

The areas mainly affected by heavier rain include the US Midwest, Western Australia, Amazonia, India and China, all of which used to  suffer regularly from severe drought.

Ask an Iowa farmer or an Indian peasant whether heavier rain is a good or bad thing!

We also know from HH Lamb that global cooling in the 1960s and 70s led directly to the catastrophic Sahel droughts and monsoon failures in India.

SLIDE 5

image

This really is a childish attempt to scare the PM.

There is no evidence that any of these “impacts” are getting worse because of global warming. Even the IPCC admit that there are no significant trends in flooding.

I notice that curious claim by the Met Office that extended periods of heavy rainfall in winter are 7 times as likely. However the actual data in England shows this to be nonsensical:

image

image

 image

image

Wildfires used to be much worse in the past, and human health is better than it ever has been.

Take malaria for instance. Death rates have fallen by a third in the last twenty years, “despite global warming”:

malaria-death-rates

As for biodiversity, the natural world has a lot more to worry about than climate.

SLIDE 6

image

Pure make believe. There is no chance at all of a 5C temperature rise. And claims about extreme weather and other impacts are not supported by evidence.

SLIDE 7

image

Again, this is model output, not evidence. No allowance is made for natural warming post Little Ice Age. But what is evident even from this graph is that the alarmist projections of warming, as already used in earlier slides, are not remotely credible.

SLIDE 8

 

image

We’re back to sea levels again, with a UK focus. So why aren’t are the UK tidal gauges exhibited? Could it be that they don’t support the Met Office’s alarmist agenda?

 

mean trend plot

SLIDE 9

image

This clearly shows that temperature rise has been consistently at the bottom end of projections, other than during El Ninos.

Since 2019 when the chart was calculated, global temperatures have declined by 0.13C (2021 is marked as X), taking the observations right out of the projections shown as the blue band.

SLIDE 10

image

As with Slide 7, this chart explains much better than I can exactly why the baseline projections of global warming are half-baked.

We must remember that all of the modern day obsession with climate – the UNFCCC,  all of the COPs, Net Zero targets, and above all the desire to impoverish us all – is predicated on those same forecasts of apocalyptic warming.

SLIDE 11

image

We’re in Day After Tomorrow territory here, all of course without any basis in fact. And we have been here before, having somehow survived all of the other prophecies of doom and catastrophe made in the past.

The simple reality is that the planet has been warmer than now for most of the millennia since the ice age, yet these tipping points never occurred. There was no runaway warming. Indeed the climate actually cooled, most notably in the Little Ice Age.

 

 

FINAL THOUGHTS

The slide show was organised by Sir Patrick Vallance, which hardly gives you much confidence!

But worse still it was presented by the Met Office’s Stephen Belcher.

The Met Office long ago gave up any pretence of objectivity where global warming is concerned, always positioning itself at the extreme end of the debate.

To ask them for advice is akin to asking Greenpeace.

68 Comments
  1. February 3, 2022 3:06 pm

    This is also debunked by Mark Morano at Climate Depot and at WUWT.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      February 3, 2022 3:44 pm

      But unless an until it gets debunked in Johnson’s mind – or the person who follows him – there is little point. Having persuaded him the green blob are hardly likely to allow anyone near him who could change his mind.

      • Ian permalink
        February 3, 2022 3:50 pm

        Which Johnson?

      • J Burns permalink
        February 3, 2022 6:32 pm

        I doubt that Johnson very much believes, understands or cares. The globalist establishment decided long ago to use this charade as cover for the unfettered looting of public funds and the private sector, and for the kicking-down a few pegs of the non-metropolitan middle and working classes. Johnson, his government, the fake opposition and the civil service serve only the establishment.

    • February 3, 2022 4:14 pm

      Boris and his govt have a short attention span. The response by climate depot is far too long winded and rambling. It needs a far shorter, pithier, bullet point type response.

      If someone can slip it past Carrie and her mates, Boris might look at something well presented and succinct. He won’t wade through reams of sometimes tedious back up material.

      Perhaps the GWPF can do a better rebuttal as there is no doubt such a document needs to be put in front all ALL MP’s, The Lords and the Cabinet in particular

      • John Hultquist permalink
        February 3, 2022 7:07 pm

        ” . . . far too long winded and rambling. & reams of sometimes tedious back up material. ”

        I agree.
        The first thing is to create a simple presentation. One chart that I cannot now find showed (forgive me) global warming in Kelvins without an exaggerated vertical – y – axis. It seems to me that the Climate Cult took Darrell Huff’s book, How to Lie with Statistics, as a “how to” manual, rather than an admonishment. Vertical axis stretching is one of the most egregious examples.
        The second problem is getting information to a PM, President, or other elite. In the USA, elected people have web sites and e-mails, but if you are not located in their district, you are filtered out. If you can send a message, you get an automated reply – and likely a solicitation for a contribution. There are probably 2 to 5 acolyte-assistants that further filter an attempt to reach the official.

      • Tom Welsh permalink
        February 10, 2022 3:59 pm

        IMHO all that’s needed is a graph of sea level, global temperature and CO2 from about 24,000 BC to now. All three have risen steadily, with no change in gradient when industry started up. Johnson should be warned that it’s all a question of when you begin your graphs.

        One supplementary graphy might be included, going back 500 million years to show that the present day is seeing some of the coldest climate since the origin of life.

  2. Jack Broughton permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:13 pm

    The simple fact is that this was one “expert / scientist / believer’s ” totally biased views. Good policy making, and good common sense, requires that the opposing view should be considered.

    I think that other factors dominated Boris’ change of heart!

    • alastairgray29yahoocom permalink
      February 3, 2022 11:53 pm

      Good point Let us hope that the GWPF are listening. I fear that the cancer goes too deep to be shrunk by reason though

    • D Hynes permalink
      February 9, 2022 5:47 pm

      Ah! You mean Carrie Antoinette.

  3. Broadlands permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:19 pm

    “This clearly shows that temperature rise has been consistently at the bottom end of projections, other than during El Ninos.”

    El Ninos are entirely natural and are sea surface values, not air temperatures. The equatorial Pacific ENSO does not correlate with Mauna Loa CO2 at all.

    “Since 2019 when the chart was calculated, global temperatures have declined by 0.13C (2021 is marked as X), taking the observations right out of the projections shown as the blue band.”

    NOAA just released their annual state of the climate report. 2021 was the fifth warmest year on record, lower than five years earlier…2016.

    NOAA satellites have been showing that the Earth has been greening, the result of added CO2 and a very small amount of warming… plus 0.84°C in 2021.

  4. JimW permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:22 pm

    To be blunt he is led by his reproductive organ.

  5. George Lawson permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:29 pm

    I wonder whether the Met man mentioned their forecast made in 2000 that ‘our chidren will not see snow after 2006!’

  6. mjr permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:32 pm

    but this just follows the level of impartiality that surrounded all the “science” advice to Johnson about covid. Sage/vallance/Whitty/van tam on one side and, er……, nobody on the other side. . And the covid science is starting to unravel now. Fingers crossed the Climate change science also unravels

    • D Hynes permalink
      February 9, 2022 5:51 pm

      The unrest among the masses from rocketing fuel bills is starting to pose a few tricky questions about zero carbon poppycock.

  7. February 3, 2022 3:35 pm

    “To ask them for advice is akin to asking Greenpeace.”
    Or asking Rose West for advice on parenting skills.

    We are way past the point where we might think, well, it looks like Vallance & Belcher are unfortunately mistaken.

    The £600,000 worth (as at two years ago) of Big Pharma shares held by Vallance (but which involved him in ‘no conflict of interest’ – HMG) when advising about Covid, is a handy clue.

    This GangGreen Agit-Prop slide show goes way beyond even the IPCC’s malevolent propaganda. And I for one wonder what kind of Christmas Cards Drax, Dale Vince and the rest of the gang send to Vallance & Belcher, not even to mention Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Mumbo Jumbo Johnson.

    • Harry Passfield permalink
      February 3, 2022 3:48 pm

      BBC news was interviewing Vince this lunchtime. Strange they couldn’t put anyone up against him….

      • mjr permalink
        February 3, 2022 4:21 pm

        they could but they wouldn’t – there is intent there

      • devonblueboy permalink
        February 3, 2022 4:50 pm

        The intent to deceive

  8. devonblueboy permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:40 pm

    “A childish attempt to scare the PM” They knew exactly the level of the PM’s scientific knowledge – it’s childish. Thus they pitched their bullshit presentation accordingly

  9. Colin R Brooks AKA Dung permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:42 pm

    I believe that the meaning of the noun johnson will be a source of hilarity for many years after this ^.^

  10. ThinkingScientist permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:45 pm

    To the warming onset etc…..

    The picture shown to Boris is CMIP5 from AR5, the link below is AR6 using CMIP6.

    On the left is the “official” version which hides the mismatch through the early C20th. On the right I have simply rebaselined the model output to match the latter half of the C20th. The mismatch is then very apparrent

    https://postimg.cc/K3ZRkrD9

  11. Ian permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:49 pm

    This is why, in a court of law or in any venue of enlightenment,
    both sides of an issue are always represented.

    It is perhaps noteworthy that, while President of the US,
    Donald Trump was known for hearing arguments from
    multiple sides of an issue before rendering a decision.

    It requires little imagination to understand why,
    in the arena of climate change, this basic principle is verboten.

  12. ThinkingScientist permalink
    February 3, 2022 3:54 pm

    Then for me my next plot (like some of our hosts) is the key. This is generated with everything baselined to 1961-1990 (the old AR5 baseline).

    https://postimg.cc/hXbc6VCR

    Hadcrut temps are in green, UAH in purple. Brown is the AR6 (CMIP6) model.

    The blue curve is Jevrejeva 2014 sea level curve (similar to Paul H’s image in this post) but scale/shifted by linear regression using the whole C20th to match Hadcrut4 temps. The brown/orange line is my glacier reconstruction using all the long record glacial retreat data, again fitted to temps.

    The two show stopper issues the climate alarmists have to answer are:

    (1) the model forcings are what drive the CMIP6 model. These have an anthropogenic forcing post-1950s which is 3x larger than the period 1910-1945, yet temps, glacier and sea level data all show the warming to be the same for both periods. How is this possible if anthropogenic effects cause the warming?
    (2) The glacier and sea level data are both physical observations whose link to temperature is not disputed. Therefore how is it is possible that glacial retreat and sea level rise start (a) as early as 1800 – 1840 and (b) continue at a largely linear rate without deviation (apart from a quasi-60 yr periodicity) continuously to date?

    • ThinkingScientist permalink
      February 3, 2022 3:56 pm

      You could also pose a third question:

      (3) Why do CMIP6 model results, when baselined to temps in the period 1961-1990, track temps higher than El Nino spikes in the C21st when the climate models cannot replicate these hot natural events?

  13. cookers52 permalink
    February 3, 2022 4:02 pm

    Just note the BBC journalist is good old Justin who invariably gets the wrong end of the stick.

    That’s why he got an award.

  14. Chilli permalink
    February 3, 2022 4:05 pm

    Ben Pile has a good thread on Twitter which clearly demonstrates Boris had already decided on the Net Zero agenda long before this misleading Met Office presentation:

    • Mack permalink
      February 3, 2022 7:44 pm

      Indeed, he was away with the green fairies long before this so called Damascene moment. It’s a made up story by an outfit that peddles fairy stories and activist propaganda remorselessly.

  15. February 3, 2022 4:07 pm

    Regardless of how fictional the slides are, just to believe the UK’s 1% of global emissions can change the course of global climate, whether at all or even in a measurable way, is just too staggeringly naïve to comprehend. We are led by a set of total ‘make-believers’ and numbskulls.

    • February 4, 2022 2:56 pm

      Virtue signallers getting pats on the back from others of their ilk; none of whom will pay the price of their stupidity

    • Tom Welsh permalink
      February 10, 2022 4:07 pm

      They are probably convinced that, once they set the example, the “lesser breeds without the law” will trip over their own feet rushing to conform.

      What fools these mortals be!

  16. Cheshire Red permalink
    February 3, 2022 4:53 pm

    Tipping points are a totally manufactured ‘crisis’, alongside the rest of the entirely fake ‘climate crisis’.

    I’ve asked many a Green on Twitter to show me an actual ‘tipping point’ that’s happened.
    Result; a deafening silence every single time.

  17. Gamecock permalink
    February 3, 2022 7:00 pm

    The assumption of the thread is that Nice Mr Johnson got tricked. ‘Conned.’ I think it wrong to presume his innocence. I don’t think he was tricked.

  18. February 3, 2022 7:05 pm

    The Met Office is corrupt, and continue to be funded because they keep lying & distorting the facts. They will never ‘come clean’ because that would end it.

    However, to think that all this Carbon baloney came about from 11 slides is disingenuous. Rather it is carefully planned & orchestrated over several decades, and naturally the globalists cabal are behind the nonsense. The Met Office is simply another useful tool.

  19. February 3, 2022 7:11 pm

    Where is the slide showing the empirical data based evidence that CO2 IS the culprit? Surely IF this is about science ( or is it cyense) before poncing around waving slides showing climatageddon, (claimed effects) it is obligatory to show evidence PROVING the cause. Where is it? Oh it does not exist. As I keep saying without proof of cause there can be no proven effect!
    The Met office is no more than a cabal of 5th columnists.

    • February 3, 2022 8:20 pm

      I’ve asked my MP for the evidence for his belief in climate change and his assertions that it’s ‘true’, but nothing, zilch. I reminded him that as he’s voted on it, he must have it and have understood it sufficiently.

  20. Ray Sanders permalink
    February 3, 2022 7:58 pm

    You had me with “cyense” so I googled it and came up with https://www.facebook.com/Cyense/
    Does make you wonder!

  21. Frank permalink
    February 3, 2022 8:24 pm

    Paul I wonder if you or anyone on this Forum, could analyse in simple language, the motivation behind these well known “Scientific Experts” purposely fabricating the evidence, as appears to be the case here. What are the benefits to them? Particularly bearing in mind that they must be aware of the real facts, and that they will be eventually be “found out” and discredited.

    • bobn permalink
      February 3, 2022 10:48 pm

      Frank. The answer is a complex web of human frailty and weakness. Many many cognitive biases are at play. Starting with the simple mistake of ‘leaping to conclusions’ on the first correlation of events one sees. (Temps up over last 100yrs and CO2 up over last 100yrs ergo – leap to false conclusion. Of course sightings of UFOs are up over last 100yrs so my bet is its UFOs whats doing it!)
      This ties into a human bias toward apocalyptic thinking – the world is always coming to an end. Then there’s human vanity – the universe revolves around us so in our small minds we are the cause and effect of all. We hate thinking of ourselves as powerless irrelevant ants. Then we have the deep religious belief in ‘original sin’. We (that ego again) are the cause of all evil. The world was created perfect and we’ve been messing it up since the first apple was eaten. Now we get ‘obedience to authority’. The Poofessor says so it must be true (think Covid crap from idiot authority figures).
      Now we get ‘groupthink’. We are a herd animal that loves to conform to those around us. If we conform we get praise and sweeties. If we dissent we are castigated and cast out in the cold (thats us lot!)
      So when a simple (but wrong) hypothesis is presented that all around agree to we join the club, and go to their church and get warm praise in the mob of worshippers. Just because the cathedral or mosque or synagoge or temple is full of chanting people, it doesnt make Gods or goblins or pixies real. But millions of people believe in Gods (irrational and unscientific as that is) including many highly educated (but simple-minded) academics.
      Manmade climate change doctrine is a religion with all its attributes.
      “Scientific Experts” at universities still teach ‘divinity’ and make up mumbo jumbo about imaginary Gods. So no small step to imaginary evil man changing the climate.
      Thats as short and simple as I can put the root cause of the AGW delusion.

      • jimlemaistre permalink
        February 3, 2022 11:42 pm

        Well said Bobn . . . I concur . . . The False correlations in a Nut shell . . .

        https://www.academia.edu/51184433/Climate_Change_For_the_21_st_Century

        My Thoughts . . .

      • Andrew Mark Harding permalink
        February 4, 2022 4:23 pm

        An excellent analysis!

        All I can add to that is this: It is sad that the vast majority of people in the world are educated from a young age into their teens or longer! Thermodynamics is not a difficult concept, sparks at 2000 Celsius from a grinding wheel, do not burn skin, because the heat energy is so tiny.

        Adding three litres of hot water to 9,996 litres of cold water, followed by one litre more is not going to significantly affect the overall temperature!

    • Tom Welsh permalink
      February 10, 2022 4:14 pm

      If you can spare a couple of hours, watch the movie “Planet of the Humans”. It explains in some detail how some billionaires have already made vast stacks of money out of “climate change”. There has been a lot of profit in building windmills and solar collectors, thanks to the absurdly generous government subsidies and the complete lack of any responsibility to maintain them and clean up at end-of-life (about 20 years).

      https://planetofthehumans.com/

      • jimlemaistre permalink
        February 10, 2022 7:27 pm

        Intercontinental Exchange Inc. (ICE) has said that trading in ‘Carbon Allowances’ has reached a record volume in 2021 on its various markets — the volume of Buying and Selling reached the equivalent of about one half of ALL global energy emissions. A total of 18 billion tons of ‘Carbon Allowances’ were traded in 2021. Equivalent to an estimated 1 trillion in US dollars. ICE trades by far the biggest market share in the Global market, although other exchanges including the European Energy Exchange (EEX) also handle sizable volumes.

        There’s one more big advantage of carbon offsets. If you’re the company selling them, Wind Farms, Solar Farms or EV makers, they can be a significant revenue stream! The best example of this is Tesla. Yes, that Tesla we all know and love, the electric car maker, who sold Carbon Credits on the ‘Market-Based Carbon Emissions Trading Exchanges’ to the tune of $518 million in just the first quarter of 2021. That is over 2 Billion dollars worth of credits because their automobiles are declared ‘Emissions Free’ . . . Emissions Free?? . . .

        Electric Cars in the United States cause to be burned at least 15 % more CO2 than Gas.

        https://www.academia.edu/62574334/Tesla_Versus_Toyota_Camry

        My Thoughts . . .

  22. cookers52 permalink
    February 3, 2022 8:43 pm

    The consensus science is AGW is a real threat to our civilisation so what do we expect Boris to believe.

    The thing that’s wrong is the policies Boris has adopted to achieve the pointless futility of net zero emissions.

  23. Thomas Carr permalink
    February 3, 2022 9:54 pm

    There’s much good ‘stuff’ to read above particularly Climatereason@4.14pm, John Hultquist ( as usual) @7.07pm and Pardonmeforbreathing @ 7.11pm.
    Journalists who fancy themselves as competent on climate matters seldom complete their homework and our M.Ps. are even less inclined to make the effort.
    So is the information available to present one graph with 3 lines showing the accumulation of CO2, the rise in temperature and the progress of industrialisation as far back as reliable records can be shown ( or another value) ?
    Surely the trend evidence will be emphatic if I have followed ‘the science’.

  24. Phil Gz permalink
    February 3, 2022 9:59 pm

    Here’s some of the Climate Consensus based news reports that supposed “scientists” and science reporters and Al have predicted many citing gov-ernment scientists or using working papers and IPCC reports since the for-mation of the UNs IPCC and its first report in 1990.

    1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years

    1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975

    1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide

    1969: Everyone Will Disappear in a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989.

    1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985

    1970: Nitrogen build-up Will Make All Land Unusable

    1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish

    1970s: Killer Bees! 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources

    1970: Ice Age By 2000

    1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980

    1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030

    1972: New Ice Age By 2070

    1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years

    1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
    1974: Another Ice Age?

    1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life

    1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent

    1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s

    1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend

    1979: West Antarctic ice sheet could melt before the year 2000 and inundate American coastlines with up to 25 feet of sea level rise.

    1980: Peak Oil In 2000

    1980: Acid Rain Kills Life in Lakes

    1988: Global Warming predicted to cause a thermal expansion of the oceans and to melt glaciers and polar ice, thus causing sea levels to rise by one to four feet by the middle of the next century

    1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s

    1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs

    1988: Maldives Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)

    1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000

    1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)

    1989: UN predicts disaster if global warming not checked {by 2000 } Senior U.N. Environmental… entire nations wiped out… rising sea levels. (www.apnews.com june 29)

    1996: Peak Oil in 2020 1996: Most glaciers in the Himalayan region “will van-ish within 40 years as a result of global warming”.

    2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is

    2002: Peak Oil in 2010

    2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat and Dairy

    2003: Over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing mil-lions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

    A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Ob-server, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020.

    Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

    2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024

    2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
    2005 : UN warns 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade. 2006: Super Hurricanes!

    2007: Could all Arctic Ice be gone by 2012? Satellites images say it might be (Star News DEC 7th)

    2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018

    2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013

    2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World

    2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’

    2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves

    2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014

    2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015

    2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’

    • cookers52 permalink
      February 4, 2022 7:32 pm

      You forgot we will all be overwhelmed by plastic, predicted in 1970 and 2020.

  25. Beagle permalink
    February 3, 2022 10:25 pm

    Rishi Sunak said something encouraging today when asked why he wasn’t taxing the oil companies. He said he wanted to encourage them to invest in North Sea oil and gas.
    Then he spoilt it by saying that wind power was cheap and would help to bring down electricity prices.

  26. 1saveenergy permalink
    February 4, 2022 12:48 am

    360 yrs of unprecedented UK temperature crisis
    From met office data (it’s self explanatory).
    Why didn’t the Met-Office show this ???

  27. February 4, 2022 9:38 am

    Slide 9, the global temperature prediction, omits the 2016-2021 ‘blue blob’ forecast. I kept it though. Here it is, along with the 2021-2025 forecast, which implies the biggest El Nino ever has already begun to build. Heh.

  28. jamesgarethmorgan permalink
    February 4, 2022 10:31 am

    Is it just me or am I the only one that reading this makes my blood boil? Sure I know it’s not just me. This makes me So fucking angry. Science was the one thing during my childhood that I held onto as a beacon of rationality and sense (mother was a nut-job father absent) – and to see science abused like this. So fucking angry.

    • February 4, 2022 10:42 am

      I would rephrase “science being abused” to “scientists abusing politics”. If politicians cannot (or will not) keep scientists within the stringent bounds of truth and reality, then it is they who are failing us. There has been a definite shift amongst these so-called scientists away from objectivity, i.e. observation of reality, to belief. The core definition of science remains, to hypothesise, then test and observe to correct that hypothesis (or replace it), to sieve out untruth so what remains is likely true (there’s never an absolute). Today it seems that only the hypothesis step is used, and the biases of scientists encapsulated in those hypotheses being presented to politicians as reality.

      • Colin R Brooks AKA Dung permalink
        February 9, 2022 6:48 pm

        james and Ilma
        You two have hit the biggest nail on the head; hypotheses are now considered to be facts, experiment and observation are history man. I remember the Bishop Hill blog before Montford became a CO2 apologist, we to debated the facts.

    • jimlemaistre permalink
      February 4, 2022 5:07 pm

      Mr. Morgan . . . I hear you . . . I feel every word . . . Ya wanna really get pissed . . .
      Read this . . .

      https://www.academia.edu/70338986/Batteries_Renewable_Energy_and_EVs

      Or This

      https://www.academia.edu/51184433/Climate_Change_For_the_21_st_Century

      My Thoughts . . .

    • D Hynes permalink
      February 9, 2022 6:16 pm

      No you’re most certainly not alone. There is some common sense and healthy scepticism leaking out on GB News from a few regulars such as Lemit Opik and Leo Kearse. However, they haven’t aired enough views challenging the zombie groupthink. Unfortunately they’re regulated by the ex-BBC run Ofcom. I’m hoping the ever escalating energy bills and likely intermittence of energy supply may eventually provide the real tipping point for the public. I hope that day comes soon.

  29. europeanonion permalink
    February 4, 2022 11:13 am

    What is really worrying is that an agency such as this has no detractors or comparators; a useful construct when you have a determination and you don’t want people interfering in your personal certainties. To imagine that no singular, huge, insular organisation cannot and does, generate its own political outlook or cannot fall foul of some concept, be it religious, political or fanciful is ludicrous. All bit companies have leaderships that impose their belief.

    But here we have mission creep that has been allowed to go beyond its fundamental, core obligation, that has gone off into coercive statistical, rhetorical flights while harbouring a strong thread of necromancy. All you need is a PM looking for a big presence in some sphere or other and your goose is cooked.

    The Met Office has to be accurate on the day to day. If I want to know what is to happen next year as an aside I will consult that woman who has been monitoring the production of berries in the wild or the arrival and departure of Greylag Geese or some other such observation.

  30. February 4, 2022 11:26 am

    Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
    Can Boris now explain the causes of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period, pre-dating industrial development?

    • February 4, 2022 11:32 am

      Not only the Medieval, but also the Roman and Minoan warm periods, and presumably others if we look further back..

    • Penda100 permalink
      February 4, 2022 5:29 pm

      I wonder id Belcher told Boris “I wants to make your flesh creep”? Perhaps not, but oh how we could do with a new Dickens to call out the cant and hypocrisy of the Climate scam.

    • D Hynes permalink
      February 9, 2022 6:22 pm

      You mean the same Ice Age and Medieval and Roman Warming periods that Michael Mann eradicated from his notorious ‘Hockey Stick’ graph?

  31. Gamecock permalink
    February 4, 2022 10:14 pm

    Boris went to the meeting looking for plausible deniability for when he went all in on climate mania. The slides gave him exactly what he wanted. He wasn’t conned. He was pleased. He was empowered.

    • devonblueboy permalink
      February 5, 2022 9:17 am

      Empowering dumb people just gets you dumb decisions – quicker

  32. D Hynes permalink
    February 9, 2022 6:24 pm

    I dearly hope the climate catastrophe fear mongers get hung out to dry -and soon.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: