Items below are important statements in earlier stages of the debate
Initial response to BBC2 'Climate Wars' 14th Sep 2008 by Piers Corbyn, astrophysicist of WeatherAction long range forecasters.
BBC2 'Climate Wars' is 'Fraud with Lipstick' says scientist. BBC attacked for lack of integrity and challenged to debate
1. This 'Climate wars' production is a shameful and desperate effort from the BBC's 'green religion department' to shore up the failing theory of CO2 driven Global Warming and Climate Change.
The piece, and the Global Warmers camp in general, while pretending to be objective skilfully avoid applying sound science and provide no answers to the mounting evidence which refutes the crumbling Global Warmers theory. It puts lipstick on scientific fraud but it remains fraud.
They selectively report part of 'weak' sceptics contributions which are muddled and AVOID proper interviews with scientists who can soundly refute every wriggle of the Global Warmers' mantra.
They misrepresents the observed facts and choose 'straw-man' methods to attack inadequate non-CO2 part-theory as if somehow trying to argue that if an animal is not a cat then it must be a dog.
They resort to the green zealots blogging method of personal innuendo rather than discussing the issues - 'Smear or belittle the messenger if you don't like the message'
2. The Hockey stick temperature graph (claiming 'exceptional' world temperatures now compared with the last few thousand years) is a fraud and 'improvements' on it promoted by the IPCC and members of the Climate Crisis industry are also fraud - with lipstick.
For the facts see Climate Audit and Christopher Monkton:
For the record I concur fully with Christopher Monckton and his conclusions.
3. Whatever may have seemed plausible 10 years ago Global Warming is over and there is no evidence that CO2 ever was, is or will be a driver of world temperatures or Climate Change - indeed evidence is the relationship is more the other way around:-
a) Temperatures drive CO2 levels in a number of circumstances (eg when the world exits ice-ages). CO2 has no observed net driving effect on temperatures. This fact is established from thousands of years of data which the 'Global Warmers' refuse to properly consider.
b) World temperatures have been generally declining for about 10 years while CO2 is rising rapidly.
c) Furthermore the period from the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago to about 1,000 years ago was warmer than present (indeed Greenland is so named because it was warmer in Viking times), there was LESS ice in the Arctic and there was notably LESS CO2 than now.
The UN Climate Committee - the IPCC - is deliberately ignoring or covering-up these facts which show in official data.
However rather than investigating the accountability of the UN and our elected representatives the BBC seems to want independent scientists and the public to be accountable to the UN and governments. See links below for more information and the letter from 13 world scientists and environmentalists to Ban-Ki moon UN Secretary General and Tim Yeo MP
4. Attempts to prove the CO2 effect 'right' by challenging an incomplete version of one solar theory are doubly dishonest because:
a) One theory being inadequate does not prove CO2 has any effect. The CO2 theory already lies in tatters - refuted by data evidence. No amount of enraged shooting at others can revive it.
b) The attacks on what the Global Warmers deem as 'solar theory' are the product of disgraceful dishonesty which marks the integrity of the scientific establishment at its lowest level since the Papal Inquisition.
The main periodical solar activity effect - the largest observed periodicity present in world temperature data - is the 22 year cycle (driven by sun-earth magnetic connectivity). Hence for about half the time, the 11 year cycle of solar activity of particles, sunspots and radiation will move with temperature and half the time move against it. This is well known to solar and climate scientists. All the pseudo-scientists have done is essentially choose time spans where the two move in opposite directions and ignore demonstrated correlations on longer time spans. Those who do this are either unbelievably ignorant of their own subject or deliberately deceptive. BBC web 'information' on the matter refuses to publish the truth despite requests and in this programme avoids interviewing scientists in Britain or overseas who research, understand and apply sun-earth magnetic and particle effects in provably skilled weather and climate forecasting***. CO2 based climate and seasonal weather forecasts on the other hand show no skill, have been abysmally incorrect for a decade and have got worse in the last few years.
5. I challenge - and there are other scientists who can also challenge - the 'Climate Wars' programme producer to a public televised debate with himself or any scientist they want to put forward.
If they had answers to the many refutations of their theory then the UN Secretary General or its Climate Committee (the IPCC) or the UK Parliament Environment Audit Committee (chair Tim Yeo MP* ) would respond to letters but they have all failed to answer simple requests for evidence to support their theory and policies under which they expect the world to be taxed and go further into food price crisis and recession. The letter of 14th July from 13 scientists and environmentalists across the world to Ban-Ki moon Secretary general of the UN has still not even been acknowledged
Integrity in science, politics and the BBC would be a good idea.
Letters to Tim Yeo MP chair Parliament Environment Audit Committee and to Gordon Brown:
Links showing the centrality of Solar activity - 22 year cycle rather than 11 year:
2nd May 2008 entry 4 from Marc Morano
Guardian July 24 07 - Green politics needed at Westminster to weather storms ahead (2nd letter) :
Guardian 18 Nov 06 letter - Basic physics supports solar activity as cause of global warming:
The role of the spotless sun:
See http://www.lowefo.com for WeatherAction forecast reportage which now includes climate forecasts and demonstrated improvement over standard meteorology hurricane forecasts that can help save lives in the all important 'end game' of forecasting hurricane landfalls using solar activity.
LETTER TO NEWSPAPERS BY Piers Corbyn, WeatherAction, Delta House 175-177 Borough High St, London SE1 1HR - 11 September, 2008
The King's North power station judgement wherby criminal damage to energy infrastructure is legitimized in the name of campaigning against 'Climate Change' must be subject to Retrial or Appeal which can expose the falsity of the new Green Religion on which the judgement relies.
The decision is a victory for brainwashing for the baseless ideology that every notable WEATHER event is presented as driven by man-made CO2 Global Warming and consequent 'CLIMATE Change'. Whatever seemed apparent 10 years ago the facts are: World temperatures have been falling for ten years while CO2 is rapidly rising; the Arctic was more melted than present from 10,000 to 1,000 years ago when there was much less CO2 and there is no evidence that CO2 has, does, or ever will drive temperatures or climate (indeed the relation is more the other way around).
Oil companies - check their websites - and governments love Global Warming hysteria because it enables them to profit from risng energy prices, carbon fixing, trading and 'Green' taxes. The problem now is that daily brainwashing by media and 'experts' on the green gravy train is so much past a tipping point that action from green zealots threatens law and order and energy infrastructure.
In July an international group of 13 independent scientists wrote to the UN Climate Committee (IPCC) asking for evidence that CO2 drives world temperature and climate. They have been ignored just as Tim Yeo MP - chair of the Commons Environment Audit Committee - is also unable to answer the question. Open government is now sacrificed to the New Green Religion.
To help readers prepare for the next deluge of climate hype note that Britain and Ireland will suffer a series of major damaging deluges and floods during the period 15th to 28th Sept and these were forecast by WeatherAction using solar activity 7 months ago. Green zealots will doubtless claim these events confirm their beliefs but will pause to ask: How many more very wet summers (these are not in their script!) must we suffer before the truth emerges?