UK’s ‘climate change minister’: We’re murdering the planet with our baked-bean farts
CO2 emissions have increased since 2011 despite Germany’s $140 billion green energy plan
…EPA chief’s weekly flights home emit tons of CO2
…‘You can pass an exam just by repeating global warming mantras’ – How To Pass A Chemistry Exam (Without Knowing Anything About The Subject)
How To Pass A Chemistry Exam (Without Knowing Anything About The Subject)
By Paul Homewood
Many will have read Andrew Montford’s & John Shade’s expose of the climate change propaganda that is being force fed to our kids, in the name of education.
Their full report for the GWPF can be seem here. It is what most of us have suspected for years, and is truly scary.
There is one section, though, that I could not resist repeating.
This is the official answer to a question in the Chemistry GCSE, (the exam for 16 year olds).
An AQA GCSE specimen answer in Chemistry, deemed worthy of full marks, includes the following words: ‘Overall I think we should be using more biodiesel as it is important for us all to reduce our carbon footprint in an effort to halt global warming’. One for a physics question includes: ‘I think wind turbines are a good idea as global warming from burning coal is an increasing problem and needs to be stopped.’
Now, we’ll just leave aside the obvious questions about indoctrination, and get to the other really serious issue.
In my day, (and, no, I’m not 202 years old) to pass an O Level in Chemistry or Physics, we had to answer proper questions about science.
The UK is crying out for proper scientists and engineers, and is it any wonder? If you can pass an exam just by repeating global warming mantras, it does not take a genius to work out why.
(BTW- if any Guardian readers are having difficulty with this pretty simple bit of logic, perhaps you should stop reading such left wing drivel).
Sent by gReader Pro…
Analysis: Examples Of Student Climate ‘Brainwashing’
Examples Of Brainwashing
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/examples-of-brainwashing/
By Paul Homewood
I briefly mentioned the GWPF report yesterday, concerning climate change brainwashing in schools.
The full report can be found at GWPF’s website here. It is by necessity very detailed, but the Executive Summary is well worth a read, if you have not already seen it.
But I thought I’d show some of the examples found, to give some of the flavour.
Let’s start with this example from the “GCSE Geography AQA A (Student Book)”, which begins its description of the climate change question with a paragraph that would not have looked out of place in a Greenpeace pamphlet:
Climate change isn’t something that is going to happen in the future – it’s happening now! Disasters, like the severe droughts in Niger, in sub- Saharan Africa, in 2005–6 and 2009, are wrecking people’s lives more and more frequently. And it’s going to get worse.
The book also includes a section about how individual children can help reduce greenhouse gases, suggesting that they join 10:10, an organisation best known for a controversial video campaign that vividly portrayed the violent death of two children at the hands of their teacher, when their parents refused to accept the teacher’s demands for action in response to her concerns about energy usage and global warming.
The text in GCSEGeography forWJEC: a Revision Guide makes several highly dubious statements, for example claiming that there has been an increase in the number and intensity of tropical storms, directly contradicting the IPCC, which says that there is low confidence that any such increase has taken place. The book’s section on the impacts of climate change features a mind map that suggests that global warming will be worse than famine, plague or nuclear war (see Figure 1). This has been taken directly from a pamphlet published by a ‘passionate’ green activist.
Some geography textbooks make passing mention of the existence of dissenting points of view, but these are often then dismissed. An example comes in GCSE Geography A AQA :
The climate is changing – global warming is happening. It’s just that a handful of people think some of the evidence isn’t great. There are other things that cause climate change, but let’s face it,we humans better take the rap this time.
Even worse was this characterisation, from A2 Level Geography AQA Complete Revision & Practice :
All scientists care about is evidence…All …
Scientists seek ‘climate-friendly cow’ of the future
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/70637ed6-bece-11e3-a1bf-00144feabdc0.html…
Social Cost of Carbon Inflated by Extreme Sea Level Rise Projections
Social Cost of Carbon Inflated by Extreme Sea Level Rise Projections
http://www.cato.org/blog/social-cost-carbon-inflated-extreme-sea-level-rise-projections
Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger
Global Science Report is a feature from the Center for the Study of Science, where we highlight one or two important new items in the scientific literature or the popular media. For broader and more technical perspectives, consult our monthly “Current Wisdom.”
As we mentioned in our last post, the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is in the process of reviewing how the Obama administration calculates and uses the social cost of carbon (SCC). The SCC is a loosey-goosey computer model result that attempts to determine the present value of future damages that result from climate change caused by pernicious economic activity. Basically, it can be gamed to give any result you want.
We have filed a series of comments with the OMB outlining what is wrong with the current federal determination of the SCC used as the excuse for more carbon dioxide restrictions. There is so much wrong with the feds’ SCC, that we concluded that rather than just update it, the OMB ought to just chuck the whole concept of the social cost of carbon out the window and quickly close and lock it.
We have discussed many of the problems with the SCC before, and in our last post we described how the feds have turned the idea of a “social cost” on its head. In this installment, we describe a particularly egregious fault that exists in at least one of the prominent models used by the federal government to determine the SCC: The projections of future sea-level rise (a leading driver of future climate change-related damages) from the model are much higher than even the worst-case mainstream scientific thinking on the matter. This necessarily results in an SCC determination that is higher than the best science could possibly allow.
The text below, describing our finding, is adapted from our most recent set of comments to the OMB.
The Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE) model, developed by Yale economist William Nordhaus (2010a), is what is termed an “integrated assessment model” or, IAM. An IAM is computer model which combines economics, climate change and feedbacks between the two to project how future societies are impacted by projected climate change and ultimately to determine the social cost of carbon (i.e., how much future damage, in today’s monetary terms, …
Global Sea Ice Area Averaging Above Normal For More Than A Year: ‘By more than the area of Texas’
Global Sea Ice Area Averaging Above Normal For More Than A Year
Since the start of 2013, global sea ice area has averaged above normal – by more than the area of Texas. This is the exact opposite of what every single global warming forecast predicted. http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008
Sent by gReader Pro…
UN IPCC ALL WET ON CLIMATE CHANGE, SAYS Consensus Busting NIPCC Report
UN IPCC ALL WET ON CLIMATE CHANGE, SAYS NIPCC
http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=846:ipcc-all-wet-on-climate-change-says-nipcc&catid=1:latest&Itemid=2
April 9, 2014: “Comprehensive Report Documents Beneficial Impacts of Global Warming”, by James Taylor, JD, Senior Fellow, The Heartland Institute; Managing Editor, Environment and Climate News, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
“The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change released a 1,063-page report documenting global warming’s beneficial impact on the biosphere. The report, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, provides a comprehensive analysis of the impact of global warming on plants, terrestrial animals, aquatic life, and human well-being.
“The new volume is the fifth produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. A sixth volume, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Human Welfare, Energy, and Policies, is scheduled for release in May.
“More than 30 scientists served as authors and reviewers for the new volume. The volume cites more than 1,000 peer-reviewed studies supporting the conclusion that global warming is not causing substantial harm to the biosphere. This directly counters alarmist assertions by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“Biological Impacts broadly tracks and critiques the work of IPCC’s Working Group II…. It appears IPCC is continuing its pattern of selectively reporting data to present an alarmist view of the impacts of climate change,” the report explains.”
Read whole report.
Visit NIPCC home page.
Read The Coming Paradigm Shift on Climate, March 27, 2014, by S. Fred Singer, one of the lead organizers of the NIPCC project.
Marie Curie, the first woman to win a Nobel Prize, once said:
“Nothing in life is to be feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.”
“By ignoring observational evidence that does not support their politically-motivated conclusions, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) promotes unjustified fear about climate change. The latest report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, presents crucially important evidence that the IPCC ignored, information that will help the public, media and politicians to understand more, and so fear less, about the consequences of climate change.”
– Tom Harris, Executive Director, International Climate Science Coalition
Sent by gReader Pro…