Climate change isn’t ‘particularly dangerous’: Richard Lindzen
March 21, 2023
By Paul Homewood
Some sanity from Richard Lindzen:
31 Comments
Comments are closed.
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
Recent Comments
catweazle666 on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo… Gamecock on Climate Professor Thinks We Sh… Gamecock on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo… Gamecock on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo… Mike on ‘Climate change is here… Stuart Brown on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo… ERNEST TERRY Mar/Eng on ‘Climate change is here… HarryPassfield on ‘Climate change is here… liardetg on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo… Micky R on Drax To Build Wood Power Cargo…
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
‘we need to make society more resilient and more wealthy’
That statement makes a awful lot of sense to me.
was waiting for the critique of the UN IPCC report, so, glad Paul has finally done this.
Glad to see that after the BBC/C4/Sky wall to wall propaganda that followed (Justin Rowlatt up an Alp pointing at shrinking glaciers etc), Talk tv is continuing to be an objective beacon in the MSM whitewash (although interestingly, as pointed out by JHB on Talk, hardly any of the newspapers reported on it – certainly not front page).
Matt Ridley was on JHB earlier this morning. Just watched Ross Clark on Mike Graham. If you didnt see them then catch up on youtube for some sensible jounalism
It was buried inside the Mail for part of a page. They picked the wrong time to release their propaganda what with the Met Police report being published and the lying oaf Johnson appearing at the Commons committee.
x
I agree with Richard Lindzen, of course I do.
I am a Professional Engineer (and consequently totally pro industry and employment in proper jobs) and one of my key creed points is; “suppose I am wrong”.
None of the green neo-Arcadians ever ask that or consider the consequences of their being wrong. The truth is that if they are right the world economy will collapse into pre-industrial poverty but if they are wrong it will implode into the Dark Ages.
If Richard Lindzen and I (and Paul and you lot out there) are right and maintain our industrial economy then we will struggle on for another 50 years or so then start to suffer growing universal poverty until we finally admit that we must reduce our population over 100 years down to below 2 billion.
This is to misunderstand the issue. Only a small percentage of activists and politicians are convinced Alarmists. The rest are either politically motivated and see this as a once in a century opportunity to destroy their political enemies or bandwagon-jumpers. I have no doubt that if the solutions being advocated were more capitalism and a smaller state, the BBC and UN would be the sceptics, not us. Climate change is now a political movement, not a scientific issue.
It always was political. A global crisis was needed to push the case for an unelected fascist world government and what better than global warming.
Yes , it always was a political scam .https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/
The heads of the UN IPCC admitted a long time ago that the whole thing was about destroying capitalism , and the Western economies so that they could bring about a ONE WORLD SOCIALIST Government .
But their control of the media etc means that very few people actually know what is going on .
Great job.
FYI Ive attached the just published paper by Richard Lindzen and William Happer by the CO2 Coalition that takes a new and far simpler approach
demonstrating all the Net Zero regulations and actions, such as those of ESG, are based on fatally flawed science
they violate the fundamentals of scientific method in numerous ways. They:
Fabricate or Omit Contradictory Data * Rely on Models that Do Not Work and IPCC Government Opinions * Omit the Extraordinary SocialBenefits of Fossil Fuels and CO2 * Omit the Disastrous Consequences of Reducing Fossil Fuels and CO2 Emissions to Net Zero * Reject the Science that There is No Risk of Catastrophic Global Warming Caused by Fossil Fuels and CO2
Chuck Weller
weller1@nxgh.net
It isn’t particularly dangerous, it isn’t much of anything. For all practical purposes, climate change is undetectable.
Undetectable? It’s not even defined!
It’s defined but in an entirely arbitrary way! Either that or in a way that “proves” it’s happening. There’s a yawning disconnect between “the climate doesn’t change naturally over the short term” and “climate is 30 years”.
If climate is 30 years, then we are just in a slightly different climate.
My climate is Cfa (Köppen). What’s yours, Cfb?
There is double-ought zero chance either is going to change.
Undetectable? Rather beneficial. Especially for agriculture (except in Sri Lanka, which got hit very hard).
Don’t see articles like this often.
https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1749034/britain-global-government-spiders-web-treaties
“Equally, is it not insane that the UK would decide to be an ultra in international agreements on Net Zero, leading to fuel poverty and inflation, plus low growth, when the largest, producer economies: China, USA, India etc are plainly not following the same path.”
The EU has a solution
EU plans for efuel cars to dodge 2035 combustion engine ban
The European Commission reportedly plans to allow internal-combustion engined cars powered by efuels to remain on sale beyond 2035
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/sustainability/359841/eu-plans-efuel-cars-dodge-2035-combustion-engine-ban
More useful if the politicians don’t ban ICE in the first place. Why is it that European politicians actively HATE their own populations?
Leftards are miserable people who hate themselves, and us.
Because they don’t think and behave as they should. Government is now entirely in the hands of officious busybodies who cannot stand other people behaving in the wrong ways. That’s why the EU and new the US endlessly regulate and ban in an unconstrained and lunatic fashion.
In Europe, it’s not only the EU. Look at the UK and Switzerland
>>That’s why the EU and new the US endlessly regulate and ban in an unconstrained and lunatic fashion.
We older people survived WW2 and we know BS when we see it, however, the panic propaganda by the UN, Green Blob aided and willingly abetted by the Beeb and MSM is having a profound effect on the immature minds of young people. Dr Joseph Gobbles would be amazed at this world wide conspiracy. The Propaganda and its effect on young minds is child abuse.
The man will be seen by future generations as the sane man in the room.
“The Killer Wave of 1607”
Worth a watch on BBC iPlayer if you haven’t seen it before. Storm or tsunami? Regardless, their model(!) suggested the very high tide that day and an 80 mph wind was sufficient. I should imagine a deep low pressure taking the right path could have backed up the tide and then accelerated it in as the wind veered, a storm surge could mimic a tsunami? Anyway, all conjecture, but still an interesting program.
Seeing the standard YouTube disclaimer posted :
Climate Change refers to long term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, mainly caused by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels.
I think someone should ask them about what we should call changes in climate prior to say 1850, going back in geologic time. For example, how should we describe the Younger Dryas other than as a period of very rapid climate change? Was climate unchanging unless fossil fuels got burned? Did climate not change until humans came along?
But there were no climate changes – surely you are familiar with Michael Mann’s cunning graph?
The court has ruled that definition too broad.
UN has identified another crisis and is holding a water ‘COP’. Of course the solution is to hand over control of water resources to the UN and their global governance.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-65035041.amp
Yes, the objective of water “security,” food “security,” et al, is to turn it over to them.
Billions will die.
They aren’t looking to make sure people have water; they are looking to control people’s water as a tool to control them. It is insidious. They want power; they will kill to get it.
Billions will die – isn’t that the idea? The only sure-fire way to reduce human CO2 emissions!
Evan Davis twice claimed on yesterday’s PM programme (1hr 20 mins approx) that FSE’s proposed pumped storage facility at Coire Glas in Scotland is equivalent to 50% of Hinkley Point C.
When fully charged it will, apparently, generate 1.5 Gw for 24 hours – 36 Gw hrs – equivalent to what is used by the National Grid in just over an hour.
Afraid the BBC has become a propaganda-spouting, campaigning outfit.
That is not its intended use. It will be drained whenever money can be made. They aren’t spending a billion pounds for the pond to just sit there and wait.