Over 1600 Scientists Signed A Declaration Saying There’s “No Climate Emergency”
Climate change has long been a topic of intense debate and controversy. Recently, a group of over 1,600 scientists from around the world signed a declaration dismissing the existence of a climate crisis and questioning the widely accepted narrative.
The Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL) released its World Climate Declaration in August, causing a stir in the scientific community and media. In the declaration, CLINTEL argues that there is no climate emergency and calls for climate science to be less political and more scientific. They urge scientists to openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should carefully consider the real costs and benefits of their policy measures.
The declaration has garnered support from 1,609 scientists and professionals worldwide, including 321 from the United States. Among the signatories are two Nobel laureates, physicist John Francis Clauser from the United States and Norwegian-American physicist Ivan Giaever. Their endorsement adds weight to the declaration and raises questions about the prevailing climate change narrative.
One of the key arguments put forth by CLINTEL is that Earth's climate has always experienced variations throughout its history. The coalition highlights that the planet has undergone both cold and warm phases, with the Little Ice Age ending as recently as 1850. They argue that the current period of warming is not surprising or unprecedented.
Furthermore, CLINTEL claims that the rate of warming is slower than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They criticize climate models for their shortcomings and argue that these models exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases while ignoring the potential benefits of carbon dioxide (CO2). The coalition emphasizes that CO2 is essential for all life on Earth and is favorable for nature, as it promotes the growth of global plant biomass and boosts crop yields.
Another contentious point raised by CLINTEL is the narrative linking global warming to increased natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods, and droughts. The coalition asserts that there is no statistical evidence to support these claims. They argue that attributing specific weather events to climate change is difficult and that natural variability plays a significant role in determining the frequency and intensity of such events.
The declaration also expresses opposition to the net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. CLINTEL argues that this policy is both unrealistic and harmful to the global economy. Instead, they advocate for adaptation measures rather than mitigation, stating that adaptation is effective regardless of the causes of climate change.
One of the signatories, physicist John Francis Clauser, has made a significant contribution to climate models by focusing on the visible light reflected by cumulus clouds. These clouds cover approximately half of the Earth's surface and play a crucial role in regulating the planet's temperature. Clauser's research challenges the current climate models, suggesting that they vastly underestimate the impact of cumulus cloud reflection.
The CLINTEL declaration also addresses the issue of false doomsday predictions made in the past. It highlights instances where climate scientists predicted an impending ice age or catastrophic environmental devastation that did not materialize. These failed predictions have led to skepticism and raised questions about the credibility of climate science.
The controversy surrounding climate change has even entered the political arena. It has become an issue in the 2024 presidential race, with candidates openly dismissing the climate change narrative. Some argue that climate change is being used as a tool for control and fearmongering, while others see it as an impediment to economic growth.
Climate change policies have been implemented worldwide, aiming to mitigate the effects of global warming. However, these policies have also faced criticism for their potential economic repercussions. The CLINTEL declaration aligns with these concerns, stating that the net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050 is unrealistic and harmful to the global economy. It calls for a more measured and scientifically grounded approach to climate policy.
The Energy Department's efforts to regulate home appliances and restrict their energy consumption have also come under scrutiny. Critics argue that these regulations can lead to increased costs for manufacturers and consumers, potentially stifling economic growth. Additionally, the banning of incandescent light bulbs and proposed restrictions on gas stoves have sparked further debate about the impact of climate change policies on everyday life.
The CLINTEL declaration raises important questions about the current state of climate science and the policies derived from it. Engaging in rigorous scientific debate and addressing uncertainties is essential for refining our understanding of climate change and developing effective policies.
It is clear that the debate surrounding climate change is far from settled. As the scientific community continues to grapple with the complexities of this global issue, it is important to consider diverse perspectives and engage in respectful discourse. Only through open-mindedness and a commitment to scientific integrity can we navigate the challenges posed by climate change and work towards a sustainable future.