Global Temperatures Global Troposphere Temperatures click here For full size []]
Providing Insight
Into Climate Change
Climate Policy
104 Articles

Misguided Math - Misinterpreted Science: Rebutting the Canadian Institute of Actuaries on Climate Change

The Canadian Institute of Actuaries (CIA) issued a public statement entitled, “Time to Act: Facing the Risks of a Changing Climate.” However, the statement is studded with assumptions that rely on mathematical climate models that are known to forecast temperatures at three to six times the observed warming rates. This is a rebuttal by the Friends of Science Society of that report. The CIA statement says, “Climate change creates uncertainty, posing a significant threat to the sustainability of our global ecosystems, health, and economies.” Climate change may be dominated by natural causes. Climate has always changed throughout time. There is little evidence that human effects on climate or greenhouse gas increases have any impact on extreme weather. Climate change is not leading to higher rates of weather-related damages worldwide, once corrected for increasing population and wealth. The FUND economic model of climate impacts shows that many places, particularly Canada, financially benefits significantly from the small warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions. The three measures advocated by the CIA are unnecessary; null and void.

IN THE DARK ON RENEWABLES: Rebutting Deloitte and Climate Reality

Deloitte Insights and Climate Reality have recently issued reports making claims that renewables – especially wind and solar – are as cheap and as reliable as conventional coal-fired or natural-gas-fired power. We demonstrate that these claims are not valid and show that wind and solar exist almost entirely due to preferential government programs and subsidies. Mass deployment of wind and solar can destabilize power grids. Solutions like batteries, flywheels, and pumped hydro are exorbitant in cost. Renewables-plus-storage systems cannot reasonably be scaled up to meet society’s demand for reliable power.

Faulty Premises = Poor Public Policy on Climate; IPCC SR15

Climate science is a complex blend of chaotic, dynamic systems. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Summary Report 15 (SR15) attempts to predict the implications of a 1.5°Celsius (C) rise in Global Surface Mean Temperatures (GSMT) over the temperature of the pre-industrial era. The focus of the report is on the influence of human industrial emissions of carbon dioxide as the assumed driver of climate change and recent warming. Despite the number of scientists involved, science can go astray for no other reason than a singular focus through ‘the same lens. The IPCC SR15 proposes that industry and taxpayers pay a carbon price of $880 per tonne on carbon dioxide emissions in 2030, but the actual benefit, in terms of an assumed lower temperature, would only be worth at most $4.

Speculative Climate Chaos vs. Indisputable Fossil Fuel Benefits

The judge in People of the State of California vs. five petroleum companies wants to see, not just the alleged damages from burning oil, natural gas and coal – but also the immense benefits to humanity and the people of California from using those fuels for the past 150 years and more. Paul Driessen and Roger Bezdek write about the huge benefits of fossil fuel and reliable electricity, including the more than doubling of the global average life span of humanity. Unfortunately, about one and a half billion people are still without electricity and "millions still die every year from insect-borne, lung and intestinal diseases – largely because they still burn wood and dung, instead of fossil fuels."

Macron’s Naievete about Climate Change

French President Emmanuel Macron believes in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Paris Agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Mr. Macron clearly bases his opinions on the findings of the IPCC's reports which are the scientific foundation of the Paris Agreement. He said that France would cover the cost of U.S .donations to the IPCC now that President Trump canceled US funding. The IPCC is not actually practicing science when they make their forecasts. It is pseudo-science for a political agenda. It is based on climate models that failed all of their predictions. In the 1960s, HadCRUT4 temperature index which the cllimate models use did not have any measurements in the oceans and few measurements on land except in four countries, and.earlier data is much sparser. Today, there is essentially no data for about 85 percent of our planet’s surface. There are fewer weather stations in operation now than there were in 1960.

web design & development by: