Cambridge University Climate Scientist Denounces “Climate Emergency” As “Noble Lie”
February 26, 2024
By Paul Homewood
h/t Patsy Lacey
Politicians and activists alike have warned of a looming climate catastrophe for decades. “Biden urged to declare climate change a national emergency,” reported NBC last year. “Climate Changes Threatens Every Facet of U.S. Society, Federal Report Warns,” announced Scientific American.
Cambridge University climate scientist Mike Hulme disagrees. “Declaring a climate emergency has a chilling effect on politics,” he tells Public. “It suggests there isn’t time for normal, necessary democratic process.”
Full story here.
27 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
It’s not “noble” in any way, just a good old fashioned lie
Given his history of climate alarmism, why didn’t he say this years ago when the government and then local councils were all declaring a climate emergency?
Exactly right. As the founding Director of Tyndall he fully supported and embellished the narrative.
Tyndall was founded in September 2000 , he was soon out of the blocks:
7 November 2000 – What can we do about climate change?
“As Britain battles through floods and major transport disruption, and the nations gear up for the UN climate conference at the Hague, how can responsible businesses and organisations prepare for climate change?
Dr Mike Hulme, the Centre’s Executive Director, said: “Society is at last waking up to climate change. What might once have been considered unusual weather conditions for the UK – the recent storms and flooding, for example – are likely to be much more frequent occurrences.”
Only a weasel would put the word “noble before the word lie”.
“Climate activists may dismiss Hulme as a “climate denier,” but he agrees the planet is warming due to human activities and specifically says we should prepare for more heat waves”.
Here we go again. The appeasement statement. It is not what he, I or anyone else may agree or disagree with.
“but he agrees the planet is 1. warming due to human activities and specifically says we should 2. prepare for more heat waves”.
WHERE IS THE DATA HULME UPON WHICH YOU BASE THAT FATUOUS STATEMENT?
As he very well knows, it is what the data says and there exists NO statistically significant empirical data of any kind which ties man directly or otherwise to the current welcome warming, the fourth warming in recent human history. If he does not know that then he is simply incompetent. Otherwise he is a liar saying what has to be said to keep his lousy job.
There is no mileage in trying to disprove the greenhouse effect.
I disagree. There is plenty of mileage in disproving the greenhouse effect and CAGW (which is accomplished in the paper linked below).
https://ufile.io/gb1xn4lh
Will give it a read.
Well said.
He’s not interested in data, this is “Post-normal science”
https://web.archive.org/web/20070325171818/http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/?p=1469
The ‘post-normal’ science of climate change:
“From the horse’s mouth — climate change theory has nothing to do with the truth. In a remarkable column in today’s Guardian Mike Hulme, ……………a key figure in the promulgation of climate change theory who but a short while ago warned that exaggerated forecasts of global apocalypse were in danger of destroying the case altogether — writes that scientific truth is the wrong tool to establish the, er, truth of global warming. Instead, we need a perspective of what he calls ‘post-normal’ science:
“Self-evidently, dangerous climate change will not emerge from a normal scientific process of truth seeking, although science will gain some insights into the question if it recognises the socially contingent dimensions of a post-normal science. But to proffer such insights, scientists – and politicians – must trade (normal) truth for influence.”
It is surely obvious to Mike Hulme that it is futile and pointless for the West to attempt unilaterally to achieve Net Zero while the non-Western world takes not a blind bit of notice of the man-made CO2 global warming hypothesis, aka hoax. Hence Net Zero is not about climate, it’s all about controlled deindustrialisation, impoverishment and ultimately depopulation.
This scheme was hatched many decades ago when the psychopaths behind it thought they could control the entire world. Now all it is doing is wrecking Western countries. These people showed their evil true colours through their Covid “plandemic”. Unfortunately, the level of establishment propaganda and censorship is so great that most of the general public don’t realise that they are being horribly abused. That may well also apply to Mike Hulme.
To get a better idea of what we are up against, listen to the recent interview of defence analyst Mike Benz. It runs to an hour of fast talking and has been helpfully split into three parts with transcripts by TCW, final part here: https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-tucker-carlson-interview-how-america-turned-on-its-own-people-part-three/.
A Platonic Noble lie was how William Happer described the position.
Remember when some leftie at the UN said that even if it all turns out to be a lie, pursuing the global warming lunacy was still worth doing.
He has a book to sell, just publicity for it, maybe he is hoping to get sales from a few of us “climate deniers”. A leopard cannot change its spots!
“It suggests there isn’t time for normal, necessary democratic process.”
So ‘climate science’ is a social science, not STEM.
Cirrusly, you ever heard of a “chemistry denier?” The simple assertion that someone is a ‘climate denier’ is a declaration of social science, not science.
It is climate social science.
^ ” It is climate social science.”
Yes, and it is a climate catastrophe culture (see Andy A West/GWPF) and a modern time’s religion:
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2022/08/29/a_guide_to_the_catechism_of_the_climate_emergency_850655.html
I equate it to 21st century Tulip Mania.
Wiki: ‘In 2020, he became a signatory to the Great Barrington Declaration. The declaration, which called for an end to lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research a libertarian free-market think tank associated with climate change denial.’
Impressive, almost Mannian levels of equal opportunity smearing there.
My impression from Battle of Ideas was that he was surprisingly open about his Evangelical beliefs. Up to him but bold I thought in that company. Noble Lie bit of an oxymoron surely? Better than a Nobel Lie anyway.
Book to sell and retirement approaching, good luck to him.
Humpty Dumpty. Lewis Caroll must have come across this in Oxford in the 19th Century
Through the Looking Glass should be required reading for Science First Year students
Doing evil in the name of doing good is the worst evil, and those committing it are the worst evil-doers.
Funny that Sharknado Warmunists and Reefer Madness prohibitionists both define altruism as “good” to justify coercion.
But he still says the planet is warming…oh really, by how much, exactly? From when to when? And how can we possibly a) compare measuring equipment AND LOCATIONS TODAY with the equipment and locations 100, 200, 500 years ago?? b) who trusts the data collection today??
”Climate activists may dismiss Hulme as a “climate denier,” but he agrees the planet is warming due to human activities and specifically says we should prepare for more heat waves.”
We’ve been preparing for heatwaves, snow-free Winters, ever-droughts, malaria epidemics, ice-free Arctic, inundated cities, etc for over 25 years… they are in huge demand but unavailable supply.
One might almost think that the whole Manmade global warming/climate change is an ignoble lie.
I take it he’s not one of the 97% of scientists that agree that climate change is man-made (that’s 97% of 1,300 respondents out of 4,000 that had written pro climate change papers)
Those are scientist-impersonators. Actual scientists with degrees signed the Petitionproject.org, which petition stopped the Senate from signing the Kyoto Kamikaze.
He’ll soon be cancelled and defunded
He was cancelled once before in 2006, when he first voiced his doubts about the politics:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6115644.stm
VIEWPOINT By Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research,
“Climate change is a reality, and science confirms that human activities are heavily implicated in this change. But over the last few years a new environmental phenomenon has been constructed in this country – the phenomenon of “catastrophic” climate change.
Some recent examples of the catastrophists include Tony Blair, who a few weeks back warned in an open letter to EU head of states: “We have a window of only 10-15 years to take the steps we need to avoid crossing a catastrophic tipping point.
I believe there are three factors now at work.
First, the discourse of catastrophe is a campaigning device being mobilised in the context of failing UK and Kyoto Protocol targets to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide.
The signatories to this UN protocol will not deliver on their obligations. This bursting of the campaigning bubble requires a determined reaction to raise the stakes – the language of climate catastrophe nicely fits the bill.
Hence we now have the militancy of the Stop Climate Chaos activists and the megaphone journalism of the Independent newspaper, with supporting rhetoric from the prime minister and senior government scientists. “
“Second, the discourse of catastrophe is a political and rhetorical device to change the frame of reference for the emerging negotiations around what happens when the Kyoto Protocol runs out after 2012.
Third, the discourse of catastrophe allows some space for the retrenchment of science budgets.
The careless (or conspiratorial?) translation of concern about Saddam Hussein’s putative military threat into the case for WMD has had major geopolitical repercussions.
We need to make sure the agents and agencies in our society which would seek to amplify climate change risks do not lead us down a similar counter-productive pathway. “
This was nothing less than Hara Kiri for Hulme. He not only attacked the government and Sir David King, government Chief Scientific Advisor at the time, but also the National Environmental Research Council, core funders of the Tyndall Centre.
A few months later he was on “sabbatical”:
“Professor Mike Hulme (UEA), the founding Director of the Tyndall Centre and who led it since 2000, has stood down as Director and is taking a year’s Sabbatical from UEA. The researchers, students and staff of the Tyndall Centre thank Mike for his outstanding leadership and his intellectual vision of academia doing climate change research that is truly useful for both theory and practice.”
“Scientific American is neither scientific nor American.” –Edward Teller