I Don’t See Any Climate Change Happening

Ashamed of being human:

UK Professor: Only Way to Save Planet Is to ‘Let Humans Become Extinct’

It’s always a professor somewhere or other, isn’t it? What’s the matter with the universities?

Giving birth to a child is “the worst thing you can do” to the climate, says philosophy professor Patricia MacCormack of Anglia Ruskin University.

The professor, author of The Ahuman Manifesto: Activism for the End of the Anthropocene who describes herself as an “old school goth,” says that the only way to save the planet is to stop having children and allow humans to become extinct.

According to the official description of the book, MacCormack “actively embraces issues like human extinction, vegan abolition, atheist occultism, death studies, a refusal of identity politics, deep ecology, and the apocalypse as an optimistic beginning.”

She would believe in climate change too, wouldn’t she?

“Even Extinction Rebellion only focus on the effect this will have on human life, when climate change is something that will affect every living being on the planet,” she states.

I find it really puzzling that so many people believe that some sort of catastrophic climate change (aka global warming) is actually happening. I can understand it if some climate scientists believe it’s happening, because they actually study climate, and can be expected to have an opinion about it. But Madonna?

Madonna pens song to tackle climate change

Do these people see something happening that I can’t see? Because I don’t see any climate change happening. In the 70+ years of my life, I’ve seen hot years and cold years, wet years and dry years, but I discern no overall trend.

It’s only when I’ve built my own computer simulation model that I get to see any climate change, when snow sheets spread across the Earth in my little model, and then retreat. But it’s just a theoretical model.

But you tell me. I’ll be very interested to know if any of my readers have personally experienced climate change or global warming.

I don’t think anybody sees any more climate change than I do. I think that if they believe that there’s climate change, it’s because they believe the experts who tell them that climate change is happening.

But I don’t believe the experts. I don’t believe that climate scientists know that much about climate. And I have a book by one of them – Principles of Planetary Climate by Raymond Pierrehumbert – in which the author has dozens of Big Questions about climate which have yet to be answered.

It’s because I don’t believe the experts that I’ve been writing my own climate model. I can’t see any other way of getting some idea what’s going on. And 40 years ago I used to build heat flow models, so I have a pretty good idea how to do it.

I guess there are just people who believe experts, and people who don’t. And I’m one of the latter. I tend not to believe experts about anything. I’ll listen to them, of course. But I won’t automatically believe any of them.

I don’t believe what the health experts tell me about smoking, I don’t believe what they tell me about drinking. I don’t believe what they tell me about sugar or salt or fat or obesity.

I don’t believe what the epidemiologists are telling me about the new coronavirus. I don’t think they know anything much about it. My guess is that it’s probably just another flu bug, whose threat they exaggerate like they always exaggerate every other threat.

About Frank Davis

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

13 Responses to I Don’t See Any Climate Change Happening

  1. decnine says:

    Well, when I was an undergraduate (mid-60s), the RAC Rally in late November usually encountered snow and ice in Wales and/or Yorkshire and/or the Borders. That sort of weather seems to be much less common now. Leading on from which, I wonder how much clearing forestry from hills in mid-Wales to make room for windmills might have contributed to the present floods on the Severn and Wye? Both rivers have their sources on Plynlimon.

  2. Margo says:

    I do believe my spring flowers appear earlier nowadays than they used to. And this winter has been warmer and a lot wetter than usual. I remember a terribly cold winter in the very early 1960s, and a very warm winter in the late 1960s, and a couple of very hot dry summers in the 1970’s.. That’s really all my experience and observation can say on the matter. Overall, I just don’t know.

  3. Rose says:

    I thought we had got rid of that EU directive on Make Way For Water after they flooded the Somersel Levels and got found out.
    But seemingly not.

    From last November

    Farmers blame flooding devastation on failure to dredge rivers
    November 13 2019

    “Farmers whose crops have been deluged and livestock evacuated in Yorkshire and the East Midlands say that the government’s failure to dredge the rivers is to blame.

    They insist that the Environment Agency should have done more to clear water channels of the silt that builds up over time on river beds. Experts, however, say that would have made little difference.”
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/farmers-blame-flooding-devastation-on-failure-to-dredge-rivers-st6fpxzjs

    EU FARCE: Brussels rules have exposed Britain’s flood defences – REVEALED
    Nov 14, 2019

    “EU directives on “habitats”, “birds”, “water” and “floods” have dominated the UK’s river management strategy for nearly 20 years. The Government’s hands have been tied by a vast list of European Union directives, critics say. The Environment Agency must obey strict rules set in the EU Water Framework Directive to protect wildlife and plants when implementing its dredging strategy.”

    “The EU insists flood risk management “should work with nature, rather than against it”, according to a note released by the bloc’s environment department in 2011.
    Work dredging the country’s waterways has been significantly scaled back because of the huge costs of disposing of silt under the EU Waste Framework directive.

    The European Commission categorises dredged material as waste rather than a natural resource, making its disposal costly and time-consuming.”
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1204008/EU-news-UK-flood-weather-latest-Yorkshire-flooding-East-Midlands-latest-update

    But we have left the EU now.

  4. Roobeedoo2 says:

    I watched a really interesting documentary last night about a climate changing event in 535A.D. Pestilence, famine, floods swept the globe. Empires and civilizations crumbled/disappeared and a new religion (Islam) was born. Man was in no way, shape or form the cause of the catastrophic climate change event…

  5. Rose says:

    EU policy: deliberately flooding the Somerset Levels
    3/2/2014

    “It is all very well for Chris Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, to prattle on about “difficult choices”, and to tell us that “more must be done to protect the Somerset Levels”. But the flooding crisis over which he is presiding is one which he, at the behest of the EU, has deliberately allowed to happen.

    Allowing the flooding of the Levels was a matter of EU policy, introduced by a 2007 Directive and consciously adopted by the Environment Agency in 2008, which then sought to increase the frequency of flooding in the area.

    What then makes it impossible for the people on the spot, like Owen Paterson, is that they are having to deal with those decisions, which were made years ago. Only now are the consequences becoming evident, while the people (or agencies) who contributed to the disaster are entirely invisible.

    In the “invisible” class is that classic elephant in the room, the European Union, which was behind the last great change in British strategy, heralded by a Defra consultation document in July 2004 called “making space for water”. It introduced “a new Government strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management in England”.
    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84683

    The reporters filming the flooding at the Somerset levels, realised that they had a different story on the hands when the old farmers told them about the neglect and told the public.

    2016
    Britain’s flooding crisis ‘made worse by the EU’: Green Brussels bureaucrats have ‘banned’ river dredging that allows water to drain faster, say farmers

    “Controversial rules on dredging rivers imposed by the European Union have contributed to the flooding which has wrought devastation across the UK, it was claimed last night.
    Brussels bureaucrats, driven by green ideology, have effectively banned dredging which might have prevented rivers bursting their banks, say critics.

    Dredging, which took place for centuries on Britain’s waterways, removes silt that builds up at the bottom of rivers and deepens the channel – allowing water to drain away more efficiently.

    But anti-EU campaigners and farmers have complained that the European Water Framework Directive, passed into law by Tony Blair’s government in 2000, has outlawed such activity. The directive’s aim is to restore rivers as close as possible to ‘undisturbed natural conditions’.

    “Former newspaper tycoon Sir Richard Storey, who farmed for 50 years at Settrington in the Yorkshire Wolds above the River Derwent, which flows into the Ouse, said dredging had become practically non-existent since EU regulations were imposed.

    In the past, water courses were dredged by hand by men from the local water boards. They dug out the silt and piled it on the banks.”
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3380694/Britain-s-flooding-crisis-worse-EU-Green-Brussels-bureaucrats-banned-river-dredging-allows-water-drain-faster-say-farmers.html

    But we can’t deduct the cost of flooded houses and sorting out the rivers from the £39 billion the EU want for a trade deal, because our governments signed us up to it.

  6. Jim says:

    As a farmer I’ve definitely noticed changes in the weather patterns. But then weather patterns have always changed, as has the climate. Winters have gotten milder and wetter since I was a kid in the 70s and 80s. Summers have definitely gotten wetter and less warm and sunny over the same period.

    Much of this change in the UK can be laid at the door of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, which is a longer term variation of the sea surface temperature in the North Atlantic. When the seas surface is cold (relatively speaking) we in the UK tend to get higher pressure systems dominating our weather, leading to hot dry summers and cold winters. That was the situation that was in place from about 1960 to 1995. Then the North Atlantic surface temperature began to switch to a warm phase and by 2000 was fully in the warm phase, which ushered in the current era of mild, damp and stormy winters, and cooler damper summers as well.

    These warm and cold phases tend to last about 20-30 years, so I fully expect that as the 2020s progress we shall start to return to a cold phase and our weather will revert to something more like the 60s, 70s and 80s. Its no coincidence that the coolest recent year for the AMO was 2018, in which we experienced the Beast from the East and the long hot summer that followed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_multidecadal_oscillation#/media/File:Atlantic_Multidecadal_Oscillation.svg

    http://www.markvoganweather.com/2018/08/08/atlantic-multidecadal-oscillation-at-its-lowest-july-value-since-1950/

  7. beobrigitte says:

    But you tell me. I’ll be very interested to know if any of my readers have personally experienced climate change or global warming.
    Your survey does not provide enough space in “other” to put a point across.
    Here is mine:
    Yes, I have observed our climate changing. Our planet does this all the time. it is high time we learn to live with it. How much has human activity got to o with it?
    A pole jump is also overdue. That means for 8 hours the population of this planet exposed to the sun is in REAL danger of being obliterated.
    Priority of malfunction on this planet’s lobby infestation ongoing? Greta’s parents, send your kid back to school. BASIC principles in any subject are priceless. Do you REALLY want your kid to face the backlash the so called experts who are hiding behind your kid’s back would have to face when everything goes pear shaped?

  8. Joe L. says:

    OT: Once again, tobacco could be responsible for saving millions of lives. It seems that when a vaccine is needed, scientists turn to tobacco. This time, to produce a COVID-19 (formerly 2019-nCoV) vaccine. One can’t help but assume the Medical-Industrial Complex has been pushing to denormalize (and eventually prohibit) the recreational use of tobacco so that they can patent the use of tobacco for pharmaceutical purposes and profit mightily.

    It’s a bit of a long article, but I wanted to post it here in it’s entirety for posterity, even though the title has an air of Antismoking smugness.

    Could tobacco cure coronavirus? Don’t laugh.

    By SARAH OWERMOHLE
    02/15/2020 07:00 AM EST

    One of the most criticized industries in America is joining the race to stop the coronavirus epidemic.

    Reynolds American, the North Carolina cigarette giant behind the Camel, Newport and Pall Mall brands, is infecting fast-growing tobacco plants with a genetically modified coronavirus to see if they can produce antibodies for a possible vaccine.

    It’s a decades-old idea Reynolds tried with limited success during the Ebola crisis in 2015 and could offset declining cigarette sales, new tobacco age restrictions and a possible menthol ban. Public health experts say the experiment, if successful, could be scaled up quickly to respond to an international outbreak.

    The Pentagon’s medical research arm credited the use of tobacco plants in 2012 for the quick development of 10 million doses of flu vaccine. “Plant-based solutions” could over time prove more effective than the typical process — growing a virus in eggs — said Alan Magill, program manager for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency at the time, adding, “the research is very promising.”

    But big hurdles remain. It would take thousands of doses to come up with an experimental treatment. Reynolds’ work is in the very early stages, meaning the outbreak could subside before a cure is close to perfected. And some vaccines may not be 100 percent effective against all the strains of a target disease, as was the case with Ebola. Such factors have kept most big drug companies away from the vaccine business: Moderna Therapeutics and Johnson & Johnson are the only companies who’ve publicly acknowledged working on a coronavirus vaccine, both with government support.

    The science behind past tobacco industry efforts to branch into medicine haven’t always matched the hype. Though nicotine has been shown to improve memory in pre-dementia patients, one highly touted treatment failed in four clinical trials — and some efforts to expand research into other conditions haven’t borne fruit. Two non-plant-based Ebola vaccines were found to be more effective than the treatment Reynolds worked on, which has never been approved by the FDA.

    The tobacco companies are still pushing forward. Besides Reynolds’ tiny Kentucky BioProcessing subsidiary, which is testing the coronavirus, Philip Morris has taken a 40 percent stake in Medicago, a firm using the similar tobacco-growing technology to try to develop a flu vaccine.

    “People can be cynical. But the fact is that we might be able to help,” said Hugh Haydon, Kentucky BioProcessing’s chief executive officer.

    The company has contacted the Trump administration’s health department about its coronavirus work and said it could provide a sample to the government by early March.

    “You can go from the gene sequence to a greenhouse or a warehouse full of plant materials in a very short period of time,” said Kenneth Palmer, a microbiologist at University of Louisville whose focused on plant-based vaccines. Palmer receives no tobacco industry funding but said the university has paid Kentucky BioProcessing to produce plants for it in the past.

    The pivot to drugmaking comes at a pivotal time for some tobacco giants. Teen tobacco use had steadily fallen for two decades before e-cigarettes swung the trend around in 2018, earning promises of a federal crackdown on the sector the companies have increasingly leaned on while traditional smoking has continued to decline. Congress in December also raised the nationwide age to purchase tobacco to 21, while lawmakers continue to debate an all-out menthol tobacco ban that would hit many of Reynolds’ best-selling products.

    Reynolds, owned by British American Tobacco, had been looking to diversify for several years. Before buying the Kentucky lab, the tobacco giant was “pulling apart the tobacco plant” looking for other uses than cigarettes, recounts James Figlar, executive vice president of research and development.

    Coming up with new business lines is one thing, but chasing an epidemic that’s sickened in excess of 60,000 people in more than two dozen countries is quite another.

    Reynolds American bought the Kentucky lab in January 2014, just two months before World Health Organization flagged the first cases of what would, over the next two years, become the deadliest Ebola virus outbreak on record, killing more than 11,000 people in West Africa. Kentucky BioSciences quickly focused all of its resources on producing a tobacco-derived component for the combination therapy ZMapp, one of the first experimental Ebola treatments to become available.

    Hopes were high in the early days of the outbreak. The FDA fast-tracked a safety review in 2015 and public health officials authorized its use as cases climbed. But over time, data began to show two other treatments were markedly more effective than ZMapp. The results were significant enough for researchers to halt a study early and recommend that health care workers abandon ZMapp in favor of the others.

    Reynolds and others behind ZMapp were not the only companies to pour millions into Ebola treatments or vaccines that may never be used again. It’s a big risk for companies, especially in emergencies where health officials may ask for thousands of doses of a still-unapproved experimental treatment that shows promise.

    “You invest hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to scale up on something that you hope might work. That’s the real glitch there,” Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said at an Aspen Institute event this week. “It is going to be a challenge to get a major company to do that.”

    “There is no question that a lot of them lost a lot of money on trying to make an Ebola vaccine,” said Ron Klain, who was President Barack Obama’s Ebola “czar.”

    Growing vaccines on tobacco plants could still hold the promise of lower overhead and less financial risk for companies, because the plants can start producing needed compounds in a matter of weeks, the University of Louisville’s Palmer said.

    Moreover, the prospect of making drugs rather than hooking new smokers is posing new questions about tobacco’s place in the world.

    “As a scientist and a researcher, I am not enthusiastic about the business of producing and selling tobacco products,” Palmer said. “But I think that tobacco companies are probably drawing on a lot of experience … It is perhaps logical and perhaps beautiful that tobacco companies are involved.”

    • Rose says:

      It’s been happening for a while, even before we got slung out of every place of hospitality.

      How a tobacco farm in Kent could provide a life-saving drug for millions
      2006

      “There is nothing unusual about the plants’ appearance, but they are nonetheless extraordinary. A genetic tweak ensures that every cell of every plant churns out tiny quantities of an experimental drug. When harvested, they could bring cheap medicine to millions”

      “The process is called pharming, and to many it is both the future of GM crops, and the future of the drugs industry. If the tobacco plants in Kent are a success, each one will provide 20 doses of an anti-HIV drug – enough to protect a woman from infection for up to three months.

      Pharming is a marriage of high and low technology that capitalises on the advantages of both. Instead of needing a $500m drug manufacturing facility that takes five years to pass regulatory approval, pharming uses simple crop-growing practices that have been honed over centuries.”
      https://www.theguardian.com/science/2006/jul/04/gm.food

      They wanted something out of the food chain because they’d been getting a lot of flak.

      “Pressure groups such as Friends of the Earth fear that if food crops such as maize or tomatoes are adopted to grow drugs in some regions, there is a risk of their contaminating maize or tomato crops elsewhere that are intended for consumption. Clare Oxborrow, FoE’s GM campaigner, said: “We wouldn’t want to see this done in food crops and certainly not in field trials.”

No need to log in

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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.