Twelve years ago, a climate research cheating scandal known as “Climategate 2009” rocked the scientific world to the core. Hacked emails among highly influential scientists at the center of worldwide hysteria over climate change revealed routine data tampering and other instances of flagrant scientific misconduct. Although the scientists implicated denied wrong-doing, emails hacked from computers at their employer, the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, revealed a consistent pattern of climate data manipulation, conspiracies to falsify data and withhold findings that cast serious doubt on the man-made global warming theory, to exaggerate the existence and threats posed by global warming, and to obstruct contrary research from appearing in scholarly publications. Aided and abetted by a complicit western media establishment, the climate crisis industry dismissed the scandal as much ado about nothing, and continued beating the drums of climate hysteria as if no
High carbon price should be set to minimise use of capture options, study finds
theiet.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from theiet.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
E-Mail
Technologies to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, such as reforestation or bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), are an indispensable part in most scenarios to limit climate change. However, excessive deployment of such technologies would carry risks such as land conflicts or enhanced water scarcity due to a high demand for bioenergy crops. To tackle this trade-off, a team of researchers from Potsdam and Berlin has now identified requirements for a dynamic, long-term carbon price pathway to reduce the demand for CO2 removal technologies and thus effectively limit long-term risks. The approach minimizes governance and sustainability concerns by proposing a market-based and politically feasible approach.
To the editor:
Much has been in the news about global warming now called climate change, and the harm it could cause. President Joe Biden wants to spend $3 trillion in an attempt to solve the problem. AOCâs Green New Deal claims that âglobal warming at or above two degrees Celsius beyond pre-industrialized levels will cause ⦠$1,000,000,000,000 damage of public infrastructure and coastal real estate in the United States ⦠global temperatures must be kept below 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrialized levels.â
The common claim is these conclusions are scientific consensus, thus beyond question. Are they really scientific consensus?
I have a thick file of claims by professors who claim they were terminated for expressing doubts about human-caused climate change. Examples include Professor Nickolas Drapela, fired from Oregon State University, Dr. Peter Ridd, ex-professor of marine science at James Cook University, Professor Judith Curry, ex-head of the Sc
A Mom’s Research (Part 2): Texas Freezing and Global Warming
Commentary
A few days ago, my husband and I were chatting about the freezing weather in Texas and the resulting blackouts. My daughter got grumpy when she heard us and said, “So you don’t believe in global warming?”
“Not necessarily. If you want to convince me, answer my questions,” my husband said. “First, is it true that we have global warming? See how cold Texas gets and how much snow we are getting.”
“Scientists said these are caused by global warming! I can find out,” said my daughter.
“OK. Second, if global warming is true, is it caused by carbon dioxide or by human activities? Third, would it help if the United States and Europe stopped emitting carbon dioxide, while China can do whatever it wants? You know, the emissions from China are more than those from the United States and Europe combined.”
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.