Jeremy Corbyn thinks there’s a “Climate Emergency.” Brother Piers does not.

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour party, seems to think there’s a “climate emergency“.

Corbyn launches bid to declare a national climate emergency

I wondered whether his brother, Piers Corbyn, who does long term weather forecasting, also thought there was a climate emergency.

According to his website, WeatherAction, he doesn’t:

#Scientists4Truth counterprotests against #ExtinctionRebellion brainwashed ClimateCult

And I came across a delightful little YouTube video that spelled it out even more clearly: Piers Corbyn; There is No Such Thing as Man-Made Climate Change.

There’s an enormous amount packed into this 10-minute video. At the outset, he briefly explains the difference between standard climate science and his own views:

“In the [standard] model, where the jet stream is depends on the temperature [of the Earth], whereas we say that the temperature depends upon where the jet stream is.”

And he then goes on to say that the temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere drops at high altitudes, and rises towards the surface, and the reason Venus is very hot is because it has “tons and tons of atmosphere.” And he says that in the Earth’s past it had a thicker atmosphere, and it was warmer, and “the atmosphere was so dense that pterodactyls could fly,” and “the atmosphere is [now] about half the density as it was.”

And then he mentions somebody who is explaining force as dependent on  1/R rather than 1/R² as in normal gravity, which may explain why the size of galaxies are all about the same.

He then turns to the structure of the modern establishment of physics, and says “In my opinion, the rate of progress of physics is being severely curtailed by just the way it’s structured, and indeed all science is structured. I saw something recently, and someone said ‘How come there haven’t been any basic new ideas in physics since Einstein?’ Or Niels Bohr. It’s true. There’s a sort of gap. I think the reason is more and  more because the academia is essentially corrupted into whatever goes goes, and whatever doesn’t go is stopped, And the Royal Society is a professional body of back-scratchers.”

He describes being airbrushed out of a Royal Society open discussion meeting. “We looked in the minutes of the meeting. There was nothing there. Completely nothing there. It was like being in Russia under Stalin at the Russian academy of sciences.”

It seems that he was speaking to members of Momentum, which is a leftwing organisation. So even if he doesn’t agree with his brother about climate science, they sound like they’re both very leftwing.

“Things are not what they seem… In Momentum there are people more who  are questioning all the given ideas. You know, ‘The European Union is Good.’ I’m not so sure now. after Greece. What, they’re eating grass, that can’t be good. The point is there is more questioning. But there’s going to be loads more questioning. We’ve got to question everything. My own beliefs on a whole number of things have changed radically in the last 10 years. When I went to Imperial College, it was ‘Science is Good!’ As long as you did science, the world would improve. I’ve discovered that science itself has got a political dimension, and it can be completely used against people. Or fake science can be used against people. But the public don’t know the difference between fake science and evidence-based science. So the front lines in all this stuff are: The Carbon Dioxide Con, which I think is used as a very big belief system to brainwash and corral people into all sorts of things: as I said, reduction of wages, de-industrialisation, and so forth. There’s a whole lot of other sacred cows in fake academia which will have to be destroyed.”

I’m glad to know that there are people in Momentum who are questioning all the given ideas. Perhaps one day they’ll get round to questioning whether Smoking Causes Lung Cancer. Because that’s fake science too. It’s all done with questionnaires, and you can’t do science with questionnaires. And it’s fake science that is being used against people. And used against people by Piers Corbyn’s own brother Jeremy. He was, after all, one the 90% of the MPs in the Labour party who voted for the smoking ban.

After listening to Piers Corbyn, I wondered what would happen if I doubled the mass and the density of the 5-layer atmosphere in my simple climate model. Would it be warmer than it is now?

Rather to my surprise, I found that it was indeed warmer, according to my model. Results for a single glaciated and unglaciated latitude with no air mixing are shown at left. “Glaciated” just means there’s snow on the ground.

So I agree with Piers Corbyn! Has the Earth lost half its atmosphere sometime over the past 60 million years? Not for the first time.

Today’s atmosphere likely bears little trace of its primordial self: Geochemical evidence suggests that Earth’s atmosphere may have been completely obliterated at least twice since its formation more than 4 billion years ago. However, it’s unclear what interplanetary forces could have driven such a dramatic loss.

About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Jeremy Corbyn thinks there’s a “Climate Emergency.” Brother Piers does not.

  1. garyk30 says:

    Climate change folks sure are ‘picky’ about which dates in the climate record to use.
    They measure our current temperatures against those at the start of the ‘Industrial Revolution’, about 1750 AD.
    They could have gone back 500 years to 1500AD or back to 1000AD.
    But; if they had done so, they would not have the dramatic increase in temperature with which to terrorize people. And politicians.

    1000AD = 14.2 C
    1500 AD = 14.0 C
    1750 AD = 13.2 C
    Present = 14.5 C

    It just is not dramatic enough to say :
    “There has been a 0.5 C increase over the last 500 years” or “there has been only a 0.3 C temperature increase over the last 1,000 years”.

  2. garyk30 says:

    What does mirror the CO2 rise over the last 1000 years?

    Let’s look at the population growth for a real ‘hockey stick’ graph.
    Obviously, population growth ‘causes’ CO2 increases.

    World population:
    0 AD = 188 million
    1000 AD = 295 million
    1500 AD = 467 million
    1900 AD = 1,654 million
    1950 AD = 2,307 million
    2000AD = 6,154 million
    Present = 7,000+ million

    CO2 levels in ppm
    0 AD = 277.3
    1000 AD = 279.4
    1500 AD = 285
    1900 AD = 295.7
    1950 AD = 312.8
    2000 AD = 369
    Present = 400

  3. Philip Neal says:

    I once briefly met Piers Corbyn (before his brother was famous) at a meeting on climate scepticism. The video captures him well – genuine, very knowledgeable and reassuringly unslick in these days of media intellectuals selling conventional wisdom.

    This page is interesting on planetary atmospheres: the main constraint on their composition is the escape velocity of the gases.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.