More than 160 Australian scientists and professionals have signed a 1,609-strong declaration stating, there is no climate emergency.
Scientists and professionals from approximately 59 countries signed The World Climate Declaration backed by the independent climate change, and policy foundation, Climate Intelligence (CLINTEL).
CLINTEL’s purpose is to function as an umpire between science and politics, truth, and fiction (see here, here, here and here).
As an independent “climate watchdog” the foundation aims to cut through propaganda by speaking “objectively and transparently.”
Through stimulating public debate CLINTEL says its goal is to reign in climate change ‘assumptions and predictions,’ which are increasingly being used to justify unnecessarily destructive climate policies.
Two pages long the There is No Climate Emergency (TNCE) declaration argues for a separation between science and the state.
“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” with scientists being free to raise questions about “uncertainties and exaggerations.”
Politicians play a role in “counting the real costs – as well as the imagined benefits” of all climate policies.
For example, doing actual science vs. name-dropping selective facts for whatever politically expedient profit can be mined from damaging catastrophic climate change policies.
“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in,” said the 1,600.
“Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.”
The document then asks, “Should we not free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”
Six simply stated points make up the majority of the content.
This begins with an acknowledgement that “natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming.”
For instance, Earth’s “climate varies, with natural cold and warm phases.”
Since “the Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. It’s no surprise that we are now experiencing a period of warming.”
Second, the TNCE declares that this “warming phase is far slower than predicted.”
This discrepancy “between the real world and the modelled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.”
Third, “climate models are inadequate.” They’re flawed. “They exaggerate and ignore how enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.”
Fourth, Net Zero is zero life.
“CO2 is plant food, and the basis of all life on earth. It is not a pollutant.”
Fifth, ditch the hype. This period of warming is not responsible for more intense natural disasters. On the flip side, there is “ample evidence to prove that mitigation of CO2 – ‘climate justice policy measures’ – are as damaging as they are costly.”
Finally, “there is no climate emergency.”
“There is no cause for panic and alarm,” the 1,609-strong science declaration reads.
As such, “we strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050.”
Concluding, the 1600 added, “Our advice to European leaders is that science should strive for a significantly better understanding of the climate system.”
“Politics should focus on minimizing potential climate damage by prioritizing adaptation strategies based on proven and affordable technologies.” (PDF)
The declaration punches hard. It’s far from a definitive list of dissenters.
Absentees included Jo Nova, Stuart Kirk, Judith Curry, and Obama Whitehouse undersecretary for Science, Steven E. Koonin.
Where CLINTEL’s declaration simplifies the dissenter’s position, Koonin’s 2021 book Unsettled makes the wider case and is worth reading.
“There’s much more to the story of global temperature change than ‘humans are warming the earth,'” he says. (p.26)
“Climate is not weather, it’s an average of weather over a long period of time. Thus, there is a difference between climate change and a changing climate,” Koonin explains. (pp.27 & 31)
He then adds, “Human influences on the climate currently amount to only 1% of the energy that flows through the climate system. Understanding the 1%’s relationship to the other 99% of natural causes is messy, and complex.” (pp.58-59)
This is because ‘the earth breathes… the climate is quite capable of varying without any help from humans. Ergo, estimating human influences is a highly uncertain business.’ (pp. 64, 70 & 71)
Koonin calls ‘the notion of predicting the climate decades into the future a fantasy.’
He also describes climate modelling as a “jarring failure” because of tampering with the data, and the “chaotic uncertainty” of the weather.
Any consensus – or settled science – is the result of this modelling being “somewhat tuned (the climate consensus books are cooked),” Koonin argues. (pp.87 & 93)
Further, “the media are garbling the message.”
There has been a hijacking of the science, where “cherry-picked data,” is used to mould, and shape policies via “popular perception.”
The science is not being portrayed to the public properly.
They get “misinformation,” “contrived analysis, misrepresentation of the results, failure of review processes, and media exaggeration such as ‘record temperatures.'” (pp.100 & 109)
Fostered by headlines like “Daily Temperature records run rampant as the globe roasts!” are simply incorrect!” Koonin exclaims, (ibid).
“Record daily high temperatures are no more frequent than they were a century ago,” he said.
It is the same with hurricanes in the United States, “the media using them as examples of the ravages of human-caused climate change is, plainly dishonest.” (p.121)
Koonin’s assertions, smash any accusation that CLINTEL is a bunch of “climate-denying right-wing extremists.”
CLINTEL’s arguments are also supported by Robert Kennedy Jnr.
Although not a part of the There is no climate emergency declaration, the 2024 rogue Democrat presidential candidate, wrote on X in July, “Climate change is being used to control us through fear.
“Freedom and free markets are a much better way to stop pollution,” RFKJ added.
“Polluters make themselves rich by making the public pay for the damage they do. You show me a polluter, I’ll show you a fat cat using political clout to escape the discipline of the free market.”
