German Scientists: ‘Media Are Playing A Dangerous Game With Extreme Weather Fear’
By Dr. Sebastian Lüning and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt
(German text translated/edited by P Gosselin)
The history of science is rich in discoveries, progress, falsehoods and confusion. How will future generations see the history of climate science? Where are they going to set the point that distinguishes alarmism from reasonable science?
August 12, 2016 could be an important date on the way to answering this question. On that date Vladimir Jankovic and David Schultz of the University of Manchester published in the journal Weather, Climate and Society an important paper of great clarity and openness. In doing so, they coined an important new term: Atmosfear, the fanning of fear through the use suspected processes occurring in the atmosphere.
Jankovic and Schultz do not mince any words. They criticize the simplistic view that extreme weather is always the consequence of man’s activity and that it could be tamed simply by reducing emissions. The recent rise in extreme weather damage can be traced back almost entirely to societal factors, i.e. the increased number of insurance companies, insured values and people settling more in areas of hazard.
The paper’s abstract tells us the important points:
…Atmosfear: Communicating the Effects of Climate Change on Extreme Weather
The potential and serious effects of anthropogenic climate change are often communicated through the soundbite that anthropogenic climate change will produce more extreme weather. This soundbite has become popular with scientists and the media to get the public and governments to act against further increases in global temperature and their associated effects through the communication of scary scenarios, what we term “atmosfear.” Underlying atmosfear’s appeal, however, are four premises. First, atmosfear reduces the complexity of climate change to an identifiable target in the form of anthropogenically forced weather extremes.Second, anthropogenically driven weather extremes mandate a responsibility to act to protect the planet and society from harmful and increased risk. Third, achieving these ethical goals is predicated on emissions policies. Fourth, the end-result of these policies—a non-anthropogenic climate—is assumed to be more benign than an anthropogenically influenced one. Atmosfear oversimplifies and misstates the true state of the science and policy concerns in three ways. First, weather extremes are only one of the predicted effects of climate change and are best addressed by measures other than emission policies. Second, a pre-industrial climate may remain a policy goal, but is unachievable in reality. Third, the damages caused by
Spiegel: Experts Slam Proclamations Of An Anthropocene As ‘Political’… ‘Unscientific’…’Science Sloganeering’!
Science journalist and geologist Axel Bojanowski at the online German Spiegel news weekly comments on the drive by activists to proclaim an “Anthropocene” age because they claim that man has so much altered the planet and is adding a new geological layer in doing so.
It all stems from accusations that man has altered the surface of the earth, its biodiversity, the oceans and atmosphere through its activity, and that this is becoming visible in the earth’s most recent geological layer.
But Bojanowski writes that a number of leading experts are calling such claims erroneous. In the subheading he writes:
Activists, artists and scientists are calling for the heralding of a new age – man has profoundly altered the planet. They’re wrong.”
He writes that these experts view the newly proposed geological designation as “a momentous error and unacceptable influence on research by political activists. It’s the story of a large misunderstanding.”
Already policymakers and leaders are scrambling to adopt the new designation and thus enact laws accordingly, he reports. And why not? A number of scientists and everywhere the media are already using the term.
Even the Scientific Advisory Council to the German government, WBGU — headed by PIK alarmist Hans-Joachim Schellnhuber — liberally uses the term. There is a push to officiailly declare the “Anthropocene” as a geological age. Bojanowski reports that seven years ago 37 scientists began a working group charged with searching out geological evidence to support the move to adopt an Anthropocene age: the Anthropocene Commission.
According to the Spiegel journalist, the commission, headed by Jan Zalasiewicz of the University of Leicester, will attempt to convince three geological commissions to adopt the age, which started at about 1950. Journal “Science” has already presented the first results, he writes.
But Bojanwski adds that a large number of experts are calling the move “bad science” because it does not meet any of the strict geological scientific standards one typically uses for establishing geological periods.
“Sloganeering in science “
Bojanowski cites James Scourse, ocean geologist at Bangor University in Wales, who says the term is “misleading and useless” and that Earth is shaped by factors well beyond the control of man. Other experts like Whitney Autin of Suny-College in New York and John Holbrook of Texas Christian University call the discussion an esoteric debate, claiming, Bojanowski reports,
German Geologist Thinks Policymakers Need To Take Geology 101 Before Entering Climate Discussion
…German Geophysicist: ‘AGW Built On Failed Scientific Assumptions And Economic Speculations’
Challenging AGW on the Eve of Destruction
Guest essay by Uli Weber, Geophysicist, Germany
Since the G7-summit at Elmau Castle (2015) and the climate summit COP21 in Paris (2015) the declared political aim of all governments of the world is a global decarbonisation until the year 2100 to save our planet from anthropogenic global warming (AGW). The AGW-paradigm is allegedly supported by 97% of all climate scientists worldwide and global decarbonisation has even been recommended by religious leaders.
And recently, on the 22nd of April 2016, representatives from about 170 nations officially signed the Paris Climate Convention for global decarbonisation at the United Nations in New York.…
U Of Leipzig Meteorology Researcher Lashes At Skeptics Of Climate Prophecy 2050 And Beyond
…Will Germany join Clexit movement?! Reuters: Germany waters down climate protection plan –
Germany has abandoned plans to set out a timetable to exit coal-fired power production and scrapped C02 emissions reduction goals for individual sectors, according to the latest draft of an environment ministry document seen by Reuters on Wednesday.
An earlier version of the draft document that was leaked in May had suggested that Germany should phase out coal-fired power production “well before 2050” as part of a package of measures to help Berlin achieve its climate goals.
The new version, which was revised following consultation with the economy and energy ministry, has also deleted specific concrete C02 emissions savings targets for the energy, industry, transport and agriculture sectors.
The document forms the government’s national climate action plan for 2050 and lays out how it plans to move away from fossil fuels and achieve its goal of cutting CO2 emissions by up to 95 percent compared to 1990 levels by the middle of the century.
The original proposals met with hefty opposition from unions, coal-producing regions and business groups who said it would cost jobs and damage industry.
Christoph Bals, policy director at environmental NGO Germanwatch, criticized the changes.
“Seven months after the successful climate summit in Paris the government is capitulating to the interests of the fossil fuel industry and missing the chance to give the economy a modernization impulse by presenting clear plans,” he said.…
Germany’s ‘Die Welt’: UN Paris Climate Treaty & ‘The Absurd Excrescence Of Climate Protection’!
…Germans Worry ‘Climate Dictatorship’ Will Trash Their Economy
Paris Fallout: ‘Radical’ Climate Bill Stuns German Industry …Warn Of ‘Climate Dictatorship’
Paris Fallout: “Radical” Climate Bill Stuns German Industry …Warn Of “Catastrophic Consequences” And “Climate Dictatorship” …”A Poison List Of Draconian Measures”!
Here’s the latest on plans by some overly overzealous German government leaders to get the country to commit economic suicide through decarbonization. In the wake of the lofty declarations made at the Paris Conference to roll back CO2 emissions, a number of high level Environment Ministry bureaucrats in Germany’s government have been eagerly concocting a “radical bill” dubbed “Climate Protection 2050″ designed to make Germany almost carbon-free by 2050. Already the bill’s extremism and disconnect from reality is coming under heavy fire. Online German national daily Die Welt has a piece by Daniel Wetzel titled: German Economy Fears Eco-Dictatorship. High costs would devastate the poor In the wake of Paris, Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks has put together a “catalogue of measures” which she and her Ministry hope will passed into law by early summer. Should the proposals be enacted into law, Wetzel writes that it would mean “higher rental prices for apartments, higher taxes, mandatory renovations by building owners, speed limits and massive cost hikes for industrial enterprises“. The proposals call for the mandatory, comprehensive renovation of buildings that owners would be forced by law to carry out. Such huge costs of course would have to be passed on to the occupants who rent or lease the buildings. Wetzel writes that Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks is moving rapidly to get the bill enacted before summertime. Industry, Wetzel writes, warns of “catastrophic consequences” should the CO2 restricting proposals be adopted. The catalogue of measures designed to lead Germany to a near zero-carbon society by 2050 has the industry spooked. Wetzel writes of an “urgent letter” by leading industry trade organizations to the Environment Ministry – one that used uncharacteristically harsh terms such as “threatening ecology or climate dictatorship”. Copies of the letter were also send to the heads of other German federal ministries, such as the Ministry of Transportation and Ministry Of Commerce. “Poison list of draconian measures” According to Wetzel some of the proposals include severe tax penalties for owners of “energy inefficient” buildings should they refuse to implement costly renovation works. The catalogue also calls for excruciatingly high taxes on heating oil and natural gas. Wetzel quotes Andreas Lücke of the German Heating Industry Association BDH: who calls the “Climate Protection Plan 2050″ a “poison list of …
German Magazine Süddeutsche calls Morano ‘one of the most powerful climate skeptics’
Marc Morano, one of the most powerful “climate skeptics” who openly confesses to himself to be a scientist. But: “I play a TV.”
The documentary filmmaker Robert Kenner shows in “Merchants of Doubt”, know how masterfully exploit the business of the doubt for their own purposes today the large corporations and political think tanks.…