A physicist who foresees a 30-year period of global cooling says other climatologists have tried to “silence” her latest research on solar cycles. Valentina Zharkova, a professor at Northumbria University at Newcastle in the United Kingdom, said the Royal Astronomical Society received requests to withdraw a press release on her team’s latest research pointing to a significant drop in solar activity by mid-century. “Some of them [scientists] were welcoming and discussing. But some of them were quite, I would say, pushy,” said Ms. Zharkova in a video interview posted Tuesday by the Global Warming Policy Forum. “They were trying to actually silence us. Some of them contacted the Royal Astronomical Society demanding behind our back that they withdraw our press release.” — Valerie Richardson , The Washington Times, 10 August 2016
Global warming advocates like to pretend they are open-minded, all about science. But let someone else’s science get in the way of their “consensus,” and you find out how little they really believe in science. Just ask Professor Valentina Zharkova of Britain’s Northumbria University. For the record, Zharkova isn’t alone in her conclusions. Other recent studies suggest the Sun is headed for a period of extremely low activity — which means, all other things being equal, lower temperatures for much of the Earth. No, the problem isn’t the science. The problem is such research is an uncomfortable impediment of the global warming complex’s unholy alliance of green interest groups, clueless movie stars, bought-and-paid-for scientists, big government politicians, and even some major corporations that see new global warming regulations as an easy way to crush their smaller competitors. There’s too much at stake to allow a heretic to question the orthodoxy. That’s why Zharkova and others are greeted with unscientific hostility. –Editorial, Investor’s Business Daily, 11 August 2016
Jarod Gilbert is a sociology lecturer at the University of Canterbury here in New Zealand. According to the byline of an article he published in a national newspaper last week, he “specialises in research with practical applications”. His latest practical suggestion can be found in the title of his article: “Why climate denial should be a criminal offense”. If Dr Gilbert were a maverick academic authoritarian, we might simply chuckle. Alas, his proposal is characteristic of a rising culture of intellectual intolerance. Even at universities, many people seek victory for their opinions not by force of argument and evidence but by brute force ‚Äì by laws like the one suggested by Dr Gilbert, by banning dissenters from speaking on campus, by campaigning for the dismissal of heretical lecturers or by shouting them down. These new authoritarians usually declare a commitment to science. They merely wish to silence those who go against it. But this desire reveals a profound confusion about science ‚Äì or, at least, about the element of science that should be protected. They seek to protect the particular theories that are currently orthodox by undermining the free competition between ideas that explains the extraordinary success of science over the last 500 years. –Jamie Whyte, CapX, 9 August 2016
The main driver of wildlife extinction is not climate change, but humanity’s harvesting of species and our ever-expanding agricultural footprint. This is according to a new study of nearly 9,000 ‘threatened’ or ‘near-threatened’ species. ‘Addressing the old foes of overharvesting and agricultural activities are key to turning around the biodiversity extinction crisis,’ said lead author Sean Maxwell, a professor at the University of Queensland in Australia. These threats, rather than climate change, ‘must be at the forefront of the conservation agenda,’ he said in a statement. –Ellie Zolfagharifard, Daily Mail, 11 August 2016
If Dame Helen Ghosh’s management of her organisation were exemplary, her thoughts on how humanity should manage the planet might be more welcome. Or as Lord Vinson put it in a letter to The Times this week, “Are there no restraints on Dame Helen Ghosh from trumpeting personal opinions with which many members may not agree?” Vinson’s letter must have struck a chord with many of the National Trust’s 4¬Ω million members. Most pay their ¬£63 annual fee because the organisation looks after hundreds of stately homes and glorious landscapes that they enjoy visiting, not because they want to bankroll an environmental lobby-group. The veteran historian and curator Sir Roy Strong, an indefatigable critic of what he sees as the trust’s “relentless push downward”, suggests splitting the organisation in two. The great collection of stately homes and their gardens could be entrusted to someone with a grasp of art and architectural history and a flair for promoting their glories without trivialising them. Meanwhile, Ghosh would be left with the landscapes, woodlands and coastlines, giving her a stronger mandate for speaking out on environmental matters. –Richard Morrison, The Times, 12 August 2016
The BBC must not let on-air guests bamboozle viewers with inaccurate statistics, its watchdog has warned, as it finds Emma Thompson was allowed to spout climate change inaccuracies without challenge. The BBC Trust found the Oscar-winning actress was permitted to make “inaccurate statements” about temperature rises during a Newsnight appearance, without being properly interrogated. A report into the BBC’s impartiality found presenters and journalists must do more to challenge statistics and statements by celebrities, politicians and spokesmen who appear on its shows. –Hannah Furness, The Daily Telegraph, 11 August 2016
Climate scientists at a federally-funded research institute say a massive volcanic eruption during the early 1990s “masked” the acceleration in sea level rise due to man-made global warming. Climate models projected sea levels to rise as greenhouse gases warmed the atmosphere, causing thermal expansion of the oceans and melting the polar ice caps. But that didn’t happen, and sea level rise slowed during the 2000s. “In stark contrast to this expectation however, current altimeter products show the rate of sea level rise to have decreased from the first to second decades of the altimeter era,” NCAR scientists wrote in their study. –Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 11 August 2016
The BBC must not let on-air guests bamboozle viewers with inaccurate statistics, its watchdog has warned, as it finds Emma Thompson was allowed to spout climate change inaccuracies without challenge. –Hannah Furness, The Daily Telegraph, 11 August 2016
