The Great Climate Science RESET.

For those of us involved in the discussion on climate science we are now witnessing the start of the Great Climate Science RESET.

Until recently a climate emergency narrative has operated uncontested and has been mostly managed by the UN and its science arm the IPCC.

But new scientific authorities have published a report for the US Department of Energy that declares that we don’t have a climate emergency, and the DoE is undertaking an official review of climate science that may force a RESET on climate policies, and could spell the end of the grip on the west by the climate emergency narrative.

The History

For the last 30 years the climate emergency narrative has ruled supreme with scientific institutions, the media, and most western liberal governments, supporting a scientific consensus that “climate change is an emergency” caused by the human emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels, and that such a science narrative was firmly settled.

Through the power of virtuous groupthink to save the planet from this emergency the UN orchestrated IPCC recommended NetZero policies that were fully embraced by western governments who signed up to a range of climate accords to address the “climate emergency” and the suppression of CO2 emissions. They agreed a consensus that CO2 was a pollutant that will continue to increase in concentration and will destroy the planet. Action was agreed by all nations that we must stop using Fossil fuels by embracing a huge change in the generation of energy and how we use it by adopting NetZero.

NetZero demanded the premature dismantling of the fossil fuel industries and the enforcement of the panic implementation of green technologies that have proved to be grossly unready for prime time. It’s now also clear that NetZero will be a massive hit on prosperity that will demand that the population “suck it up to save the planet”.

In the western nations vast amounts of public and private money and resources have been expended, and a huge climate emergency industrial complex has been built to undertake NetZero.

But although some difficult and expensive energy transitions have been undertaken in some western nations, and despite many climate emergency love-ins by the UN and other organizations, little progress has been made globally to change the shape of the energy sectors or make any effect on CO2 emission reductions.

To the contrary the rate of global CO2 emissions continues to rise due to the emerging nations who have cleverly avoided the NetZero efforts and are getting on with growing their economies and their citizen prosperity with the use of fossil fuels.

The traditional scientific institutions have fully supported this climate emergency narrative and its very clear in retrospect they may have been politically and financially subjugated by the vast amounts of funding that has come with their strict adherence to that frozen climate emergency narrative, with snouts firmly in the funding bucket, and none of them very interested in upsetting the gravy train by questioning with real scientific facts the climate emergency narrative.

Any scientific experts that questioned the climate emergency consensus and tried to explain or discuss any alternative scientific truths that went against the consensus were deemed climate deniers and suffered various forms of censorship through the peer review and publishing process or they found funding or careers jeopardized if they did not subjugate to the consensus and emergency narrative.

Of course, the media loved this climate emergency process that made for sensational press.

Also, the growth of new more aggressive environmental movements enthusiastically acted as climate emergency activists that provided an escalating feedback system to amplify and solidify this new political/scientific religion into the social fabric of the western world.

Most politicos found this climate emergency a useful talking point and something to get behind to gain political advantage that was easy to talk about in a noble manner without much real and near-term policy commitments.

Until recently the climate emergency narrative managed by the UN and its science arm the IPCC operated uncontested and has been allowed to generate politically subjugated science reports that mainly followed the climate emergency narrative with the reports structured with science sections and a separate section for policy makers that in many cases placed the political cart firmly ahead of the scientific horse.

As the power of the UN strengthened they developed a strong PR environment to construct a scientific consensus and continuously sell the climate alarmism to governments and the general population.

Significant social conditioning assisted by sensation seeking media occurred across the western society that was aided by the political and financial subjugation of both scientific and learning institutions with the consensus message amplified by the growth of aggressive environmental movements and liberal wokeism.

This frozen narrative of climate emergency has fostered what many are calling an ongoing situation of “Climate Alarmism”.

As the climate alarmism matured it became politically entrenched and took steps to avoid any discussion outside of the frozen narrative of the climate emergency and includes an ongoing refusal to face any open debate on any alternative scientific theories and to close down any discussion with the retort that the science is settled.

We all would agree with a peer review process as it exists in many branches of science and engineering, but some alarmists, probably to protect the narrative have arrogantly insisted that all scientific discussion be undertaken via peer reviewed material, even when its clearly being censored by the frozen narrative, and for some it appears to be a ruse to evade the truth .

This entrenchment was not driven by the scientists themselves but the politically charged environment they had to operate within with liberal funding and a strong political narrative of a science that is deemed settled. The scientist faced censorship enforced with the threat of difficulty in getting reports and papers published and the elimination of funding and damaged careers unless the climate emergency narrative was upheld.

This has degenerated into political and financial subjugation and censorship of all those that practice climate science.

The Climate Realists

Until recently our western societies have been fed a steady diet of “Climate Alarmism”

But a rapidly growing group of scientists that disagreed with the climate emergency narrative emerged and started talking about “Climate Realism”.

As already mentioned, climate alarmism dominated with professional censorship against anyone that argued against the climate emergency narrative. But out of frustration due to the inability to have their scientific views heard and debated this climate realists formed into alternative scientific organisations and study groups to talk about climate realism.

For a while these climate realism organizations were tagged by the official scientific institutions as having vested interests and subversive agendas or were slated as cranks and classed as uninformed climate deniers.

But now these climate realism groups have developed into a powerful team of climate science subject matter experts.

Also, their membership has grown significantly, and they have reached critical mass in terms of providing contradictory data and conclusions that demonstrates a competitive scientific argument against the climate alarmism narrative with strong scientific databases and reports and presentations and documentary videos etc.

They don’t dispute that humankind has been a participant in liberating CO2 with the growing use of fossil fuels, but they don’t see the increase in temperature as being all due to CO2 or that the increase in temperature and its impact on the environment is any kind of an emergency.

This growing body of scientists now following the climate reality journey are making it very clear that the science is far from settled, but that instead of CO2 mitigation we may just need some focused adaption to slowly changing climate.

It’s interesting to note that in many cases the climate realists don’t have to dispute the bulk of the detailed scientific data and technical findings from the IPCC or other peer reviewed material, but just allow the scientific facts to be reviewed and allow conclusions to be drawn without the constraint and enforcement of the climate change emergency narrative.

Its very clear to those of us that study both sides of the scientific argument that although the alarmists have been very clever at creating an emergency narrative that has been called a scientific consensus the climate realists have extremely strong and believable arguments that almost destroys the frozen climate emergency narrative or at the very least confirms that the climate science is unsettled and that much more work needs to be done and that it is highly realistic to not go forward with NetZero any time soon.

The Great Climate Science Reset Begins….

The combination of strong and convincing scientific facts from the climate realists declaring that we don’t have a climate emergency coupled with the visible adverse impact to prosperity of the NetZero journey has forced some western governments due to citizen pressure to balk at following NetZero, and some western nations have already reversed some related NetZero taxations and policies.

One western government that is taking decisive action on resetting climate change policy is the USA. They are now following a non-NetZero policy that is reversing the very costly green agenda driven by the previous administration. The new policy focus is on an energy plan that will better support industrial growth and prosperity and any issues with climate or weather conditions will be handled with focused adaption projects.

But the US administration has agreed to continue to look deeply at all the scientific facts and risk factors on a changing climate to ensure that a far better balance is managed between any climate change risks and human prosperity.

To this end the US department of energy (DoE) asked a group of leading scientists who are clearly climate realists to convene a climate working group and write a report that provides a Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate.

The US DoE Climate Report

The United States Department of Energy climate Report has now been published, and the report summarizes its findings as follows.......

The DoE report is an important tool to unfreeze the dangerous frozen narrative that the climate science is settled and stop the political subjugation and censorship of the scientific peer review and publication process to avoid the corruption of the scientific process and reinstall constructive debate and scientific integrity to get to a better policy balance.

The DoE had realized that If any open and professional scientific discussion can be undertaken it will have to be facilitated by national governments, as the UN and its IPCC and traditional scientific institutions has proved to be heavily polarized toward the climate emergency narrative and appear unable to avoid putting the political cart ahead of the scientific horse. This is highly evident when the IPCC policy maker sections are compared to the science sections, when sometimes the science section gets tweaked to conform to what wants to be said in the policy section. It’s clearly been an ongoing corruption of science.

The DoE report declares that Climate change is mild, impacts are small, and mostly benign, and the future predictions using climate models that are not fit for the purpose just don’t work. And maybe CO2 is not the main driver of temperature and may actually be more beneficial than harmful. We don’t have a climate emergency and in fact some climate changes are beneficial to human flourishing, and no need exists for CO2 mitigation. And we must not place constraints on our energy systems that in turn will place risk on our industrial capability and prosperity.

And so… Based on the report NetZero is unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish.

DoE Report Follow-On

Although there will be aggressive pushbacks from the climate alarmists the DoE will host a formal public review of the report and seek amendments as needed and convene follow-on national level reviews and debates to reach closure and a better balance of climate science and economic policies.

The debates will: -

1. Review what changes may be needed to the so-called official peer review process to avoid past issues experienced with the IPCC and the other traditional establishments who have been found to be fraudulent more through political subjugation than pure lies, but the result has been the same ... they cannot be trusted with the truth. Hence what future role should the alternative scientific review groups such as the DoE team, CLINTEL and CO2 Coalition etc. need to play to ensure future integrity of the scientific process.

2. Review CO2 as a participant in global warming and to establish its validity as an active GHG, and review and conclude the many compelling scientific reports and presentations being prepared for publication that dispute its level of participation as a driver of climate change. The alarmists have continued to provide dubious theories about CO2 being the temperature control knob, but the realists have scientific evidence that shows CO2 to be a small bit player in climate change.

3. Review the alternative drivers of climate some of which are deemed not in any way caused by humans as some of them use proven science and are very compelling.

4. Review the validity and accuracy of the short- and long-range measurement of average global warming that has generated the hockey stick that is now being questioned due to both the Urban Heat Island Effect (UHIE) and quite frankly the corruption of the collected data. The alarmists declare a hockey stick that says global temperature increase is unprecedented, but the realists show that current global temperatures if correctly measured are not unprecedented and have occurred at least 3 times before in the last 10,000 years and much warmer than today, and humans flourished.

5. Review the methodology for climate predictions that have always been suspect due to both the issues already mentioned and the inaccuracy of climate models that are not yet fit for such a purpose and need improvement. These models must be updated to include the simulation of the impact on the climate of clouds, the variation of the suns output and intensity, earths position, and its relationship to the galactic forces such as gamma rays etc.

6. Review and confirm the IMPACT of current climate change. It is believed to be mostly benign with current climate impact metrics showing no signs of adverse conditions that could be deemed an emergency or unprecedented, and, in some cases some impacts are assisting human flourishing due to the power of fossil fuels, and there are improved benefits of the slight increase in global temperatures and the beneficial increase in CO2.

7. Review the requirement for NetZero and confirm that it is currently deemed unnecessary, technologically unattainable, economically unviable and extremely foolish and why NetZero must be avoided to maintain prosperity and that climate mitigation is not to be undertaken although some focused adaption may be needed.

8. Review the national energy solutions to ensure that they are compatible with the requirements of a modern economy as its clear that are concerned a modern economy with a strong industrialized economy cannot tolerate energy solutions unless they are abundant, low-cost and reliable. And green compatible alternatives should only be considered if they don’t impede these three prerequisites. So far, such options do not appear to be available in their current state of development with the only viable solution currently being traditional fossil fuels or nuclear energy.

The Future.

This change in climate policy by the USA and the DoE report findings may set a precedence and force a general review and possible reset of climate science policies across the western world and spell the end of the grip on the west by the climate emergency narrative that has been orchestrated by the IPCC.

It may also be the beginning of the end of a global order to control climate policy and the UNs ability to force such polices on the western world who for a number of reasons are fast realizing that the UN’s many initiatives may not be in the best interest of the mature economies and their citizens.

It’s clear from many western national opinion polls that as democratic voting cycles are undertaken political tipping points will force changes in governments and policies that will move away from a focus on NetZero and its adverse impact on industrialization and prosperity. This situation will no longer be tolerated by citizens who have seen the erosion of their living standards for far too long.

A lot of political inertia does exist to undertake such a reset, as massive amounts of public monies may have to be deemed “wasted” if this reset takes place. But as new governments cycle through the democratic process it will allow the new politicos to move on without any blame for past mistakes.

We all should look forward to the DoE report review process and the opportunity to avoid any further political subjugation of science already mentioned.

The DoE report is a RESET to get back an open fact-based review of the climate science and to expose and validate the truth and set realistic policies for a prosperous and safe future for all citizens.

Links...

New Climate Report from the US DOE - by Nigel Southway

‘Grossly exaggerated’: Media gives ‘little attention’ to new bombshell climate report

CLIMATE LINKS http://www.nigelsouthway.org/storage/01K3KQSBWVPEJM21PJMD74DZB4.pdf

Take Back Manufacturing www.nigelsouthway.org

……………………………………………….