Dr. Richard Lindzen responds to the MIT letter objecting to his petition to Trump to withdraw from the UNFCC.

Apparently, MIT didn’t like its name being used in petition to Trump. Dr. Richard Lindzen responds to that letter.

March 9, 2017

President Donald Trump
The White House
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

On 2 March, 2017, members of the MIT Program in Atmospheres, Oceans and Climate (PAOC) sent a public letter to the White House, contesting the Petition I circulated. The Petition, signed by over 330 scientists from around the world so far, called for governments to withdraw from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Since MIT’s administration has made the climate issue a major focus for the Institute, with PAOC playing a central role, it is not surprising that the department would object to any de-emphasis. But the PAOC letter shows very clearly the wisdom of James Madison’s admonition, in the Federalist, 10:

“No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.  With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time.”

For far too long, one body of men, establishment climate scientists, has been permitted to be judges and parties on what the “risks to the Earth system associated with increasing levels of carbon dioxide” really are.

Let me explain in somewhat greater detail why we call for withdrawal from the UNFCCC.

The UNFCCC was established twenty five years ago to find scientific support for dangers from increasing carbon dioxide. While this has led to generous and rapidly increased support for the field, the purported dangers remain hypothetical, model-based projections. By contrast, the benefits of increasing CO2 and modest warming are clearer than ever, and they are supported by dramatic satellite images of a greening Earth.

We note that:

  • The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) no longer claims a greater likelihood of significant as opposed to negligible future warming,
  • It has long been acknowledged by the IPCC that climate change prior to the 1960’s could not have been due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases.   Yet, pre-1960 instrumentally observed temperatures show many warming episodes, similar to the one since 1960, for example, from 1915 to 1950, and from 1850 to 1890. None of these could have been caused by an increase in atmospheric CO2,
  • Model projections of warming during recent decades have greatly exceeded

Bills to fix EPA science introduced in House

Both inspired by the work of JunkScience.com (as told in “Scare Pollution“). The media release is below. For the the full background story, read “Scare Pollution: Why and How to Fix the EPA.” ### SST Committee Members Introduce the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017, EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act … Continue reading Bills to fix EPA science introduce in House

Source: Bills to fix EPA science introduced in House

WaPo Warmist Cherry Blossom Claims Refuted: ‘Nothing But Lies And Statistical Manipulations’

Reader David Reich left a comment in response to Kenneth Richard’s post on grape harvests and climate . I’ve decided to upgrade it as a post below. Both stories show that today’s climate is well within the range of our climate’s natural variability over the past 100 and 1000 years, and that today’s weather events aren’t unusual.

Source: WaPo Cherry Blossom Claims Refuted: “Nothing But Lies And Statistical Manipulations”!

DELINGPOLE: The EPA’s Air Pollution Scare Is Just Another Fake News Myth

By Paul Homewood http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/07/delingpole-the-epas-air-pollution-scare-is-just-another-fake-news-myth/ From Dellers on Breitbart: More fake news from the Washington Post : turns out that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has helped save Americans from a substance which kills 4.2 million people every year – air pollution.

Source: DELINGPOLE: The EPA’s Air Pollution Scare Is Just Another Fake News Myth

No, climate change didn’t cause ‘5 Whole Pacific Islands’ to be swallowed by sea level rise

From the reason #75 why we don’t subscribe to “Scientific American” anymore department. Back in May of 2016, there was the usual brainless caterwauling over Sea Level Rise caused by climate change, SciAm picked it up: Sea-level rise has claimed five whole islands in the Pacific: first scientific evidence Even The Guardian said the headline was…

Source: No, climate change didn’t cause “5 Whole Pacific Islands” to be swallowed by sea level rise

Angelina Jolie Thinks We Should Eat Insects Instead Of Other Animals

On her campaign trail for a recent movie, Jolie spent her down time in Cambodia “educating” a group of children on how to fry and eat scorpions and tarantulas. Crickets were also on the menu, and she joked that when starting to consume insects you always start with “crickets and a beer.” The rationale behind all of this is that consuming insects is apparently more “environmentally stable” than conventional animal foods.

Source: Angelina Jolie Thinks We Should Eat Insects Instead Of Other Animals