Climate dissent grows hotter as chill deepens

By Christopher Booker

 Have your say      Read comments

Last week, virtually unreported in Britain, the extraordinary winter weather of 2008 elsewhere in the world continued. In the USA, there were blizzards as far south as Texas and Arkansas, while in northern states and Canada what they are calling "the winter from hell" has continued to break records going back in some cases to 1873. Meanwhile in Asia more details emerged of the catastrophe caused by the northern hemisphere's greatest snow cover since 1966. Read more from Christopher Booker In Afghanistan, where they have lost 300,000 cattle, the human death toll has risen above 1,500. In China, the havoc created by what its media call "the Winter Snow Disaster" has continued, not least in Tibet, where six months of snow and record low temperatures have killed 500,000 animals, leaving 3 million people on the edge of starvation. advertisement It might have seemed timely that in New York an array of leading climatologists and other experts should have gathered for the most high-powered international conference yet to question the "consensus" on global warming. After three days of what the chairman called "the kind of free-spirited debate that is virtually absent from the global warming alarmist camp", the 500 delegates issued the Manhattan Declaration, stating that attempts by governments to reduce CO2 emissions would "markedly diminish further prosperity" while having "no appreciable impact" on the Earth's warming. This inevitably attracted the kind of hysterical abuse that has become so familiar from warmist fanatics, tellingly contrasting with the measured arguments put forward by the scientists present. One was Anthony Watts, the meteorologist who last year famously forced Nasa's Goddard Institute to correct a fundamental error in its data on US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s but the 1930s. On his website, Watts Up With That, he is currently posting a corrected version of the global temperature graph, combining satellite and surface data from all four main official sources. A measure of his scrupulous reporting is that although this shows a recent dramatic dip in temperatures, he cautiously explains that it is not yet conclusive evidence that the world has entered a new cooling phase (as he points out, there was temporarily an even sharper drop after the "peak" El Niño year 1998). But can we doubt that, if the data showed the opposite, the media would be rushing to report this as yet further "proof" that the planet is heating out of control? The fact is that, for all their caveats that this drop in temperatures can be explained by the cooling effect of La Niña, the official orthodoxy that "more CO2 means more warming" is facing its most serious challenge yet. In light of the colossal price we are all in so many ways being asked to pay for it, the data in coming years will be more than interesting. MPs stand firm on their own irrelevance The spectacle of 311 MPs endorsing Gordon Brown's lie that the Lisbon Treaty is not a repackaged version of the EU's rejected constitution - to justify breaking the promise of a referendum on which they were all elected - was degrading. But there is just one faint argument that might be used to support the claim that nothing about this treaty is significantly new. As anyone realises who has read the long succession of European treaties (which I would bet doesn't include more than two or three MPs), they have been a constitution in the making for 50 years. The original Treaty of Rome set up institutions for a supranational "government of Europe", which was always intended to take over more and more of the powers of member states until the process was complete. The new treaty merely marks another significant step in that process, enabling the EU to take its place on the world stage as a government in its own right. For 35 years, as our MPs have given away ever more of their powers to decide the laws that govern Britain, the only reason that more people have not realised how far the process has gone is that our politicians have been so anxious to hide the extent of the power they have already surrendered. Our loss of the right to govern ourselves has been shrouded in such layers of obfuscation and deceit that most of our politicians no longer even realise how dishonest this has made them. There was a vivid little example last week from David Miliband. Explaining on the Today programme why it was right not to keep that promise of a referendum, he said that it was the job of Parliament "to scrutinise legislation and then decide whether or not to pass it". "This," he said, "is what we pay MPs for." In fact, for years there has been no better illustration of the humiliating impotence to which Parliament has been reduced than this "scrutiny" charade, whereby MPs perfunctorily consider the endless flood of EU laws that they cannot influence. On Thursday, for instance, there was much excitement over the discovery that the manufacturers of an anti-depressant drug, Seroxat, could not be taken to court for concealing evidence that it might drive people to suicide, thanks to a glaring loophole in the law. But the reason this law was so ill-drafted was that it emanated from the EU bureaucracy, as health minister Dawn Primarolo tacitly admitted. Thus the British Parliament no longer has the power to amend it. The only way it can be changed is for Ms Primarolo to plead her case with our real government in Brussels. This was only one of thousands of new laws each year which have supposedly been "scrutinised" by MPs. Why should they notice the loopholes when they no longer have any power to change the laws? If Mr Miliband argues that this is what MPs are paid for, his own logic suggests that they should no longer be paid for a job they cannot do. MPs conceded as much themselves on Thursday, when Bill Cash moved an amendment to reverse the provision of the treaty which gives EU law primacy in every respect over the will of Parliament. Only 50 MPs supported it, including 41 Tories - against the wishes of their party's leadership. The rest were happy to accept that the Parliament to which they belong should no longer rule this country. A tax on lager? Time to sober up, Dave David Cameron, as we know, does not believe in "banging on about Europe". This perhaps explains why he left the fighting of the EU referendum battle to his foreign affairs spokesman, William Hague. Instead, he joined George Osborne in a vote-catching call to curb binge drinking by increasing the taxes on extra-strong lager. But if the Tory leader were ever in a position to honour this promise, he would discover that upping the excise duty on alcohol is rather more complicated than he thinks. Under EU directive 92/83, the scope of a British government to tax alcohol is severely limited, and to single out extra-strong beers for a higher duty would be illegal. If only Mr Cameron took more interest in "Europe", he might discover that, far from being just a matter of "foreign affairs" which he can leave others to worry about, it has become the government which he, like the rest of us, must obey.

 Have your say    

""Global warming" merely means more energy in the atmosphere" -- but, Mr 'Sailor', the observational evidence shows that there has been no rising temperatures over the last 7 to 10 years. So no extra energy.

And of course even if there were higher temperatures, you cannot provide any evidence that it is man-made. It would be interesting to listen to you trying to justify that the medieval warm period was man-made.
Posted by TrevorH on March 9, 2008 4:37 PM
Report this comment

The AGW case is based almost entirely on computer modelling as there is no sufficiently large data gathering project to allow for statistically sound analysis of CO2 equivalent gasses. That is ignoring the fact that no co2 equivalent countering gas analysis program exists. We know for certain that we reduced the output of Sulphur Dioxide, a potent anti greenhouse gas in the acid rain cleanup of the last thirty years
The AGW lobby claims that AGW science has been peer group reviewed. This is not the case as these models have only been reviewed by other climate scientists and not a peer group of computer modellers.
Climate science is an inexperienced user of computer modelling and any internal review will be on a similar basis if other inexperienced computer model users. They are also trying to model something of several orders of magniture more complex than any othe computer model application. The results can only be considered at best to be tentative guides.
The only valid review procedure would be to engage computer modellers from other fields with a much longer and better record of producing valid, substantiated by correlation with statistically sound validation programs.
This would not however be acceptable to the AGW lobby because those would be dominated by oil exploration companies, car design companies, aircraft companies and electronics companies.
In short those who have produced products that have to, firstly work, and secondly have customer acceptance without the ability to extort the payment by force as taxation. And lets be honest if a prerequisite of supporting AGW theories was a ban on supporters using any of these products to set an example we would hear no more.
Posted by D Cage on March 9, 2008 4:28 PM
Report this comment

CB, like most political commentators, is gifted with great literary skill, but is simultaneously functionally innumerate.

He cannot separate the short term variations caused by known effects such as El Nino & La Nina from the long term effects of global warming. No doubt as the rising waters swirl around the Torygraph buildings he and his ilk will still be in denial.

Posted by Sailor Steve on March 9, 2008 4:12 PM
Report this comment

Oh come on Simple Sailor, you are talking nonsense
and you know it. Try looking back through recorded
history to see when the worst weather was. The
current weather patterns are actually quite average.
Posted by pewkatchoo on March 9, 2008 3:50 PM
Report this comment

How refreshing to hear a reasoned arguement about climate change - a welcome boost for open debate. So many people are depressingly swift to deride those who doubt what erroneously is presented as a universally accepted scientific truth.
Posted by Nick in Stockholm on March 9, 2008 3:48 PM
Report this comment

Simple Sailor 1:02
Your theory that 'more energy means more violent weather' will come as a surprise to all those atmospheric scientists who were under the impression it was caused by the temperature differences between one air-mass and another. I hope you will submit your idea to a scientific journal, and be sure to include measurements showing that there is in fact 'more energy in the atmosphere' than in 2006.

You are right to point out that one year of rapid cooling does not make a trend. To my mind even the conventional 30 years is only a short-term trend, but of course that has never stopped alarmists claiming one summer's temperature or ice-coverage as a 'sign of global warming'. The trouble is we have now had nearly a decade with no significant warming trend, and that just doesn't fit the CO2 hypothesis. We have seen 30 years cooling, 30-ish years warming, 10 years no-change, and now some ominous signs of a cool-down. The only part of it that is even consistent with the CO2 theory is the bit where the temperature was rising, and that doesn't in any way prove the theory is correct. What is lacking is any firm evidence for the AGW theory's basic assumptions regarding the expected amount of water-vapour and its net effect on temperature, without which it is little more than speculation. What the last 10 years do tell us though, is that CO2 has not been driving the temperature during that period, if it ever does.

Posted by John B on March 9, 2008 3:32 PM
Report this comment

G. Tingey 2:08

Have you any idea what happens to an academic scientist's career if he "denies" man-made global warming ?

Did you know that lobby pressure is being put on The American Meteorological Society to expel members who are "deniers" ?

Have you noticed how global warming "denial " is being linked to Holocaust denial ?


Posted by Galileo on March 9, 2008 3:26 PM
Report this comment

It won't be long before Al Gore and his followers are referred to as "deniers", deniers of the reality that we humans are not as powerful or influential in this universe as some of us would like to think we are!

Posted by John Plummer on March 9, 2008 3:21 PM
Report this comment

These people that met were not "leading climatologists" but fringe dissenters.
All people who think that climate change is a conspiracy.........ask yourself what the scientific community has to gain. Then ask what the oil and gas companies have to lose, if there was or is any conspiracy it is on the other side of this.
The greenhouse effect is not a new theory, but one that has been studied for over 20 years.


Mark you sound quite hysteric for someone speaking about hysteria. Please post links to the evidence you speak of. Everyone who has commented that climate change is fake has failed to cite any evidence....anecdotal evidence of snow in your yard is meaningless...I have some anecdotal evidence as well. I live in the Maritimes and we have had several THUNDER storms in the dead of winter.
Posted by Sarah on March 9, 2008 3:15 PM
Report this comment

The EU government to be followed by one central world government in the not so distant future. The NWO is forming right in front of out eyes.
Posted by greg white on March 9, 2008 3:10 PM
Report this comment

I am grateful to Mr Booker for drawing attention to the recent International Conference on Climate Change in New York. I have looked at the sponsor's website today and it is clear to me that the Conference gave a forum to those scientists who do not agree that CO2 from human activity is causing dangerous global warming. Personally, I want to be empowered to examine both sides of the argument, so I can come to a conclusion that I can intellectually support. I have been surprised, for instance, to learn that human CO2 emissions account for only one thousandth of total green house gases (0.01%). 95% comes from water vapour. So if human CO2 levels are important, surely water vapour levels are critical?

I was also interested to learn of the data which shows a correlation between sunspot cycles and global temperature.

Another interesting snippet was the possible effect that deforestation at the foot of mountains can have on glaciers further up the mountain. In our examination of CO2 levels, we should not lose sight of all the other environmental harm we are causing. Are these other factors affecting the climate?
Posted by Helen on March 9, 2008 3:09 PM
Report this comment

Ten out of ten, Christopher - I sincerely hope this article makes a few of the 'waverers' think before blindly accepting as gospel truth the world-wide garbage spewed forth daily by the 'Global-Warmers'.

The entire concept has been siezed by corrupt governments - the EU and our own being classic examples - as a superb mechanism for raising taxation - as long as their propaganda continues to be the only view of the highly unscientific theories proposed thus far.

No amount of cash transfers to Brussels will reduce the global temperature by as much as 1 degree ! Face it - it is a MYTH !

Not too many years ago these same muppets were sounding off about 'The New Ice-Age' with their 'scientifically conclusive' arguments.

We all do have to face it - the World does indeed have quite alarming cyclic temperature swings - it has been going on for longer than mankind has been around.

To dishonestly sieze upon very flimsy 'conclusions', of which the exact opposite could also be claimed from the same 'evidence' is more the 'Sign of our Times' of political corruption than of any true scientifically proven 'consensus ( of the usual small band of government funded culprits ) that global warming as a process has begun - a process which is seriously doubted by open minded scientists who have been 'silenced' the world over.

'Global Warming' is a government-sponsored monetary theft vehicle - not unlike those employed in the devious world of banking by the 'Sub-Prime' market dealers !

They are blatently 'Snake-Oil' hawkers - keep hold of your cash !!
Posted by John Bull on March 9, 2008 3:05 PM
Report this comment

> For years the sceptics have raved > that there is insufficient evidence > for warming yet a three months of > cooler weather is taken as evidence > that there is cooling.

Yes...3 months of cooler weather is evidence of cooling...very FLIMSY evidence, but then, taking 100 years worth of weather data from a 4.5 BILLION year old planet is also quite flimsy...
Posted by Rich Moraghan on March 9, 2008 3:03 PM
Report this comment

Thanks for bringing some science to the global warming alarmism. Eco-fanaticism has become more intolerant and dogmatic than any major religion.
Posted by Meredith Weaver on March 9, 2008 2:51 PM
Report this comment

Two dismal opening segments outlining the ending of the primacy of the UK Parliament in our affairs. What is it that politicians see in this for themselves which we, the people, cannot see as of benefit to us?

What is the gain in ceasing to be a nation state, and a world leading one at that, in order to become the mere province of a rag-bag state made up of countless of our past enemies, corrupt regimes, and peripheral states barely shorn of their Soviet shackles.

Britain, of all the nations in Europe, had the most outside Europe in terms of economic, historic and social links. Why has the English speaking world and the Commonwealth been sacrificed on this altar - in order to diminish ourselves?
Posted by simon coulter on March 9, 2008 2:49 PM
Report this comment

link
Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

link
Cold Water on ‘Global Warming’



Posted by John K on March 9, 2008 2:44 PM
Report this comment

Hot outside? Global Warming. Cold outside? Global Warming. Mind closed like a trap? Global Warming. Cheers!
Posted by Tom McFadden on March 9, 2008 2:31 PM
Report this comment

Global Warming is the new religion of fanatics. The adherents of this religion are far more dogmatic than any mainstream religion I could name. Their minds (not the skeptics) are closed like a trap. By the way, there are now studies that "alternate fuels" such as ethanol are really bad for the environment because by de-forresting the land to plant corn you are removing a very effective source of absorbing CO2s. Now isn't that special?
Posted by T. McFadden on March 9, 2008 2:30 PM
Report this comment

The burden of proof rests on those who want to change our lives through legislation. The global warming crowd, unlike the dissenters, has that burden. Current cooling trends do not "prove" global cooling, but they show that the facts are still unclear. Case not proven.

Posted by Ed Mahl on March 9, 2008 2:26 PM
Report this comment

Well, Bill Kapra, then this group sounds exactly the first group that offered the original "consensus" in the first place!
Posted by Bu on U on March 9, 2008 2:26 PM
Report this comment

One glaring ommission in the great CO2 debate is that no-one ever seems to mention the 24/7 burning of gas flares from ois reserves. My husband many years ago asked anengineer why this gas wasn't sold off to consumers and the reply was amazing. "We don't have the pipelines or storage facilities neccessary". Why were they not constructed instead of uselessly burning this precious fuel? As a footnote my husband's friend also told him that to pour salt onto the wound, the rigs were charged for gas they used for cooking or heating!
Posted by Elizabeth Lindsey on March 9, 2008 2:13 PM
Report this comment

You've confused Anthony Watts with Steve McIntyre
about the NASA correction. Otherwise, wonderful
article, and thank you.
===================
Posted by kim on March 9, 2008 2:09 PM
Report this comment

I suggest, that before the "Telegraph" publishes anything as ill-informed, uneducated and downright wrong on any scientific topic, that the editorial staff consult their own science writers.

If Mr Booker really thinks (you should excuse the word in this context) that there is evidence against global warming, I'm sure the Royal Society, and other professional scientific bodies would welcome the new evidence he has calimed to uncover.
Posted by G. Tingey on March 9, 2008 2:08 PM
Report this comment

As I watch our over-paid MP's trail out of those hallowed halls in our Parliament Building to vote last Wednesday, the moment that disgusted and sickened me the most was the voting on Mr Cash's New Clause 9, which Christopher Booker picked up on here, "when Bill Cash moved an amendment to reverse the provision of the treaty which gives EU law primacy in every respect over the will of Parliament".

Only 50 MPs supported it, just 41 Tories - against the wishes of their Party's leadership. (Did they think the people that cast their votes at General elections would not notice or remember?) The rest were happy to accept that the Parliament they belong to should no longer rule this country".

Well the people will remember and should this Lisbon Treaty be ratified, I too may join the growing band of people that will with-hold their taxes for they refuse to accept foreigners governing their Country forever and continuing to instigate laws that destroy their British way of life. It would be far better for MP's to remember where their loyalty lies and reject the Treaty of Lisbon outright, or, let the people do it for them a referendum.
Posted by Anne Palmer on March 9, 2008 1:54 PM
Report this comment

Please note that the group who gathered in New York was not composed of 'leading' climatologists. Not all were scientists and very, very few are currently active or reputable researchers.
Posted by Bill Kapra on March 9, 2008 1:45 PM
Report this comment

Everyone needs to remember that much of the theory of Global Warming has been advanced by a "Politician," by the name of Al Gore. And as anyone of sound minds knows, believing anything a politician tells you is done at great risk. And to top up the obvious, Mr. Gore also tells us he invented Email. What this proves is, two wrongs don't make Global Warming a fact, rather the G.W. theory is little more than political fantasy, and it is well past time for the worlds "honest" people to admit same.
Posted by daniel on March 9, 2008 1:40 PM
Report this comment

"Bill Cash moved an amendment to reverse the provision of the treaty which gives EU law primacy in every respect over the will of Parliament. Only 50 MPs supported it, including 41 Tories - against the wishes of their Party's leadership. The rest were happy to accept that the Parliament they belong to should no longer rule this country".
Why is this fact (EU Primacy) not widely reported? CB does his best but the MPs know that if the general public was fully aware of it and its consequence (They can not doing anything about the EU laws)they would question the need to have 635 parasites in parliament?
INCIDENTALLY the Lisbon Treaty allows countries to LEAVE the EU.
On your way David Cameron - do not leave it all to UKIP.
Posted by m cawdery on March 9, 2008 1:11 PM
Report this comment

I enjoy CB writings over the years. However, on the subject of CO2 causing global warming I find him rather naive. Any attempt to change established myths will receive "hysterical" out bursts whether it is CO2, Fat% in diet, salt intake, cholesterol, etc., etc. If something is against the myth of their belief its WRONG but the will not read the proof that it is the myth that is wrong
Posted by m cawdery on March 9, 2008 1:02 PM
Report this comment

Even with Global warming not every region is going to get warmer, some will actually get a little colder
Posted by axt113 on March 9, 2008 12:57 PM
Report this comment

Actually, has anyone noticed that with the northern hemisphere in winter, the phrase "Global Warming" debate has morphed into "Climate Change"?

I guess it's a bit difficult keeping the momentum of "warming" going when everyone is freezing their butts off!
Posted by Mark M Newdick on March 9, 2008 12:56 PM
Report this comment

How long before the M.P.s are not really needed? Why should we pay them more and more, to actually do less and less?
Posted by I.T.Macnamara on March 9, 2008 12:53 PM
Report this comment

The Earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years, long before the advent of homo sapiens, and is likely to continue to do so until the sun dies. The present global warming hysteria is based on the predictions of computer models but there are far to many unknown variables for these to be accurate. In the not too distant future new energy sources will become available, leaving the age of fossil fuels to history. But the earth will continue to warm and cool at its own pace.
Posted by Simon Marshland on March 9, 2008 10:11 AM
Report this comment

A somewhat tongue in cheek, rhetorical, question but as the article states 'For 35 years, as our MPs have given away ever more of their powers to decide the laws that govern Britain' why do we still have so many MP's and quangos if the 'work' has been exported?
Posted by MikeK on March 9, 2008 10:07 AM
Report this comment

I would appreciate it if somebody could tell me what IMPORTANT provisions of the draft constitution have been omitted from the Lisbon Treaty.
Posted by Phil Roberts on March 9, 2008 9:13 AM
Report this comment

An article written really about nothing. As you admit in your final statements, the drop in temperatures over the last year is related to the recent La Nina, which followed an El Nino in winter 2006/2007. This is just like the drop following the 1997/1998 El Nino, although not as large, because the more recent El Nino was not as large. Can you really not understand that variation in the climate is composed of the sum total of the annual cycle, natural variability and long term trends?
Posted by Andy Taylor on March 9, 2008 8:42 AM
Report this comment

Absolutely right on the button Mr Booker. Our nation is in jeaopardy not through terrorism or global warming but through our greedy,self serving politicians. Keep up the good work. It's time more British people were given the truth about the deceit over the EU issue.
Posted by John Wilkinson on March 9, 2008 8:41 AM
Report this comment

Why do we not hear these incredible stories discussed on the BBC? That has been a most important pr agency in the deadening of any 'debate' on the eu, turning it into a matter of necessity not freedom rather like the weather.
As to climate change: this new religion grows apace, it has a liturgy, cardinals, some popes, and a mass evangelistic agency, mentioned above.
Posted by Janice on March 9, 2008 8:37 AM
Report this comment

I thought the traditional purpose of Parliament was to govern by fashioning laws which promote the interests and well being of its people.
Now,apparently they only scrutinize EU laws and have little power to change or veto.
In both job descriptions they seemed to have been a failure so why cannot we get rid of them and make The Houses of Parliament into a very upscale hotel?
At least we would then have money coming in instead of the present occupants gross squandering of taxes upon anything which is in their own selfish interests.
By the way they wouldn't be allowed to run the hotel. Their bar and food bill would bankrupt it too quickly.
Posted by Minnie Ovens on March 9, 2008 8:11 AM
Report this comment

Whilst it is true that some places in the world have experienced cold weather in recent months, other places (for example, the city in which I live, Stockholm) have experienced record highs. Weather is naturally variable so massive amounts of data are required to establish trends and draw conclusions. An enormous global temperature data set available is published by the Hadley Centre and this shows that for every month so far this winter global temperatures show positive anomalies (i.e. higher than average). Highlighting isolated weather incidents to question global warming indicates that you confuse weather and climate.
Posted by marc roddis on March 9, 2008 8:04 AM
Report this comment

Our MPs remind me of benefit cheats,
taxpayers have elected and pay them to make laws and govern this country.
They have given most of this job to the EU.
They should be prosecuted for false pretences.
Posted by richard Beddall on March 9, 2008 7:43 AM
Report this comment

Getting rid of the scroungers (that is all of the parliamentarians)?
All for it especially our local dictator GB with his lacky Darling.

We can actually start thinking for ourselves then. Oh damn it I forgot those idiots in Brussels.

Ah well the Muslim world will eventually take over so that is sorted then.
Posted by Richard on March 9, 2008 7:40 AM
Report this comment

Ed Millinabd did th same thing on BBC Question time, Of all things he said about the E U is the wonderful way we cooperate on Climate Change.
WE ALL NO THAT THIS IS NATURE IN THE RAW. CLIMATE CHANGE IS JUST ANOTHER TAX SCAM

Posted by Stancombe Smith on March 9, 2008 7:38 AM
Report this comment

As our MPs, of all political colours, clamber aboard the EU gravy boat, it's no longer worthwhile arguing the toss. On this issue, Cameron and Osborne are as big liars as Brown and , er, whatsisname. Then, of course, there's that young bloke, Nick Legg from the joke party.
It's the other mega-lie that interests me - global swarming. I call it that, because it resembles nothing so much as locusts. Swarms of political insects, gathering for a feast of taxes 'to save the world'. Another farrago of dis-information enthusiastically embraced by the Cameroons.
The brushing aside of facts is a standard feature of socialism, a feature without which socialism could not exist. Thus, Mr Cameron has dodgy looking credentials. I trust the 'blue-rinse' Tory groupies (of both genders) will read the findings of the SCIENTISTS in New York and give pause to think about their boy wonder.
Why are politicians the only group of unquestioning believers in Global Warming? Do they know something that we do not?
Of course not - they are not as bright as we are, or as honest, or as questioning, or as sincere - but they do like to please their masters; rather like the culture of pack dogs. To show your allegiance/fear/deference to the pack leader, you kiss his mouth,lick his arse and cower.
Posted by Graham King on March 9, 2008 6:56 AM
Report this comment

Forget about it all.
Tell me, where is the money in it for ME?
I am tired of thinking about things that make no change in my life.
Let them do whatever they like to do, and give me a decent life, that is a good income, nice place to live in, cheap food, etc and nice neighbourhood that I enjoy living with.
Leave the politics (as such) to rich...

Posted by Mack, Harrow, London, UK on March 9, 2008 6:53 AM
Report this comment

Climate on earth has changed ever since the Earth were created and will continue to do so. We have had at least four ice ages (some scientists say many more as we may have had one ever 10,000 years) and are still recovering from the last. The climate scaremongers are a leftie political movement - just look at who supports it.

And as usual: Mars has *proven* global warming so it is apparently a normal thing for a planet.

Posted by odin on March 9, 2008 6:31 AM
Report this comment

Absolutely unbelievable, and yet,since true, the mother of, current,parliaments, is no longer master in its' domain.
Rhodes may be smiling.
The "mob at Westminster' no longer has much to do with anything.

Europrean bureaucracy as a substitute for war......

Become accustomed to it.

It is your future.

Regards

Boris B. Bray
Posted by Terry L. Watkinson on March 9, 2008 6:27 AM
Report this comment

Until recently Mr Booker was saying that, yes, the climate *is* warming - but this is a natural cycle and not manmade.

Now he is saying that the exceptional cold weather some places are experiencing proves that there's no such thing as global warming.

Sounds like having cake and eating it, to me.

My understanding of global warming is that there may well be exceptional, and large, changes to the *weather* both up and down temperature-wise.

But, as anyone with a slight knowledge of meteorology knows, weather and climate are two completely different things.
Posted by Rog on March 9, 2008 6:00 AM
Report this comment

The whole warming thing is a gross fraud. The "scholars" who support the idea of human-generated greenhouse gasses as a cause of warming are each and every one hoping to ride the gravy train of grant money that floods in when disaster seems likely. They arent stupid, they sing loud songs of impending disaster, but they are criminal liars. Shady, self-important rascals like Al Gore stand to make a falsely accumulated fortune off trading idiotic carbon credits in a phoney zero-sum game on an open-ended system.

Honest geologists (I am one) know what a jigantic hoax it is. We also know crap like the Kyoto plan would wreck the economy and our way of living.

Just look what the ethanol scam has done to grain prices in the past few months, and that's the tip of an emerging ice berg of stupid folley.
Posted by Terribleturk on March 9, 2008 5:41 AM
Report this comment

We are finally hearing from the part of the scientific community that has applied scientific logic instead of politics to the natural phenomena of global warming AND cooling. The high priest of global warmer and the recipient of that leftist propaganda award the Noble Peace Prize is no where to be seen with his inconvient lie in the midst of one of the worlds harshest winter in history.
Posted by Robert H. Boyer on March 9, 2008 5:03 AM
Report this comment

With a keen and informed interest in history, I know that the world was in any event a much warmer place throughout the so-called Dark Ages and Medieaval period; there is ample attestation to this in many records. A mini ice-age hit us during the 17th century, lasting through the 18th century and throughout the Victorian period; our current concepts of what an English winter ought to like be are based on recent memories.
I have long felt that "climate change" is just another stick with which Government can beat us, and seek to impose controls over us; the nouveau middle classes, eager to assume a burden of guilt for anything one may care to mention, have signed up willy-nilly for the climate change guilt-trip, and so our lives are impoverished by pointless exercises in self-deprivation.
Even were it true that so-called "climate change" is due to our activities, Britain's lemming-like pursuit of the Green option would be quite pointless, as long as China and India continue to build coal-fired power stations by the dozen each month.
Bah humbug, I say !
Posted by Robert Douglas on March 9, 2008 4:37 AM
Report this comment

Pollution is still one of the greatest threats to the future of humanity, regardless of its connection or otherwise to global temperature. Air and water pollution are poisoning people in the developing world, shortening their lives if not actively killing them. Previously cultivable land is being ruined and crops tainted in a time when the world's population continues to increase.

We live in a finite environment; destroying large areas of it will affect all of our futures in terms of health, migration, and the economic results of both. Reburying our heads in the sand will just result in a faceful of toxic waste.
Posted by dm on March 9, 2008 4:31 AM
Report this comment

My front garden in Toronto is now covered with
at least three feet of dense snow. The
temperature has been at least minus 10
centigrade for most of the winter, and much
colder at night. This is my 27th winter here, and
by far the worst. There is no global warming in
Ontario. Can the 'green' idiots' please shut up,
and get lost. Life is tedious enough, I have
cleared tons of snow since November. Why do
governments listen to the ranting and ravings of
the wretched "global warming" morons?
Posted by Brian Zhang on March 9, 2008 4:00 AM
Report this comment

Thanks for publishing this story on the great global chill of 2008 - exactly opposite to the trend predicted by the IPCC, NASA's top climatologist, Dr. Hansen, and the famous Noble Laureate, Al Gore.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor
link
link

Posted by Oliver K. Manuel on March 9, 2008 3:59 AM
Report this comment

Time for Cod war IV. They are raping your coasts and laughing at your impotence. Take your National waters back so you may manage them for thier recovery; and for the productive use for British fishermen.
Posted by chris on March 9, 2008 3:25 AM
Report this comment

I bow to no-one in my admiration for Anthony Watts and his volunteers in their effort to examine the instruments in the USA which record the temperatures on which that part of climate change is being monitored -- particularly as he is subjected to a considerable amount of abuse for daring to look at the science -- but I think the man to thank for the NASA correction was Steve McIntyre of the Climate Audit blog. The incident should remind everyone that much of the data we see about this subject is predigested and corrected, some of it by people with an agenda.

As to the cold winter -- it's weather. It proves nothing either way, just as the huge temperature spike in the 90s from the big El Nino was weather. We would be well advised to wait and see. Despite what we are told there doesn't seem to be a need to panic yet, not if the world can cool at this rate just from internal fluctuations.

JF


Posted by Julian Flood on March 9, 2008 3:20 AM
Report this comment

All things balance out. We are at a sunspot minimum and a La Nina (The opposite of El Nino) event is ongoing in the Pacific.

What all the 'We're all going to die horribly' crowd forget is that nature and subsequently the climate run in cycles, and humanity doesn't have as much of an effect as it would like to think. If we as a species want to look after the environment, we should be trying to pollute less, not fuss about things we have very little influence on. Rather like the UK Parliaments effect on the EU. The British electorate don't seem to have say about that, either.
Posted by Mister Jones on March 9, 2008 3:18 AM
Report this comment

The weather is a complex mechanism, perhaps those who only obtain their knowledge of the possible impacts of global warming from sensationalist media reports and conspiracy theorists think that the only effect will be hotter weather. Extreme weather, hot or cold, wet or windy, caused by global warming or not, is going to happen. Try to develop a long term view, one year of cold weather does not refute global warming. Still, yet again it's a baby-boomer who's objecting to having to change his life in any way.
Posted by Adam on March 9, 2008 2:44 AM
Report this comment

I think the most important point is that if we are effectively getting most of our laws from the EU now - completely putting aside weither thats a good thing or not...

What on earth do we still need these masses of ridiculously overpaid UK politicians and beuracrats for now...?

Would'nt just a group of EU legal administrators be more than enough to do the job of turning EU law into UK implimentations..??

I think post this treaty they should all be out of a job!

After all we do need to see some of the much vaunted EU cost-saving....

QED!

Posted by Mark on March 9, 2008 1:35 AM
Report this comment

The Anthropogenic Global Warming hysteria will rage on no matter how much evidence is put against it; it is, like all hysterias, inherently irrational and resistant to evidence. In years to come, when historians wonder how could some peoples and their governments have been so stupid as to try to ruin their economies on such flimsy grounds, there will still be some eco-nuts raving about it (as there are still some convinced Communists around after all that happened in the XX century). It is incumbent upon all of us who do not want to return to the darkness to sabotage and oppose all CO2-related measures by whatever means at our disposal.
Posted by Frederick Davies on March 9, 2008 1:34 AM
Report this comment

You can say that again!
Posted by Bob Doney on March 9, 2008 1:27 AM
Report this comment

"Global warming" merely means more energy in the atmosphere, more energy means more violent weather. That is exactly what we are seeing.

For years the sceptics have raved that there is insufficient evidence for warming yet a three months of cooler weather is taken as evidence that there is cooling.

I know that after eleven years of "education, education, education" has diminished the critical thinking of the average school child but can we have a little scientific rigour from the broadsheet newspapers, please.
Posted by Simple Sailor on March 9, 2008 1:02 AM
Report this comment

Please remember that the submission of any material to telegraph.co.uk is governed by our Terms and Conditions (clause 5 in particular) and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Your name: *

Your email address: * (We won't publish this.)

Your site's URL: (If you have one.)

Please click the post button only once - your comment will not be published immediately.

* = Required information

BUSINESS Market turmoil Follow the world's worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

TRAVEL Sign language This week's selection of curious signs and bizarre translations.

CULTURE Billy on Broadway Billy Elliot has opened in New York to rave reviews.

FILM American mom Down-to-earth star Julianne Moore talks to David Gritten.