Met Chief: UK Snomageddon ‘is merely a natural fluctuation’

Wow! Finally, someone has come up with a new line of BS about all the recent total bombardment of snow and cold in Great Britain! No, it’s not ‘weather’, nor is it ‘climate change,’ or ‘global warming,’ or even ‘climate disruption. It’s astoundingly not even that Arctic cold that is now claimed to be caused by global warming!

Today it’s ‘merely a natural fluctuation!’ Yes that’s right ‘natural fluctuation!’ Amazing!

So, who came up with this? Why it’s the nutty British MET Office again in the winner’s circle. It’s even the MET Offices’ Chief Scientist, Professor Julia Slingo! While I’ll give her an “A” for this comment, I will still give her an “F” for FAIL as she still believes in the global warming fairy. (Al Gore?)

Still, it’s damn amazing someone’s finally admitted we have good old-fashioned weather events that are not driven by global warming. I think I’ll get a Scotch on the rocks and give the good Professor a toast.

I wonder what kind of odds I can get in Vegas that she’ll lose her job by New Years Day?

Definitely a new kind of CO2 Insanity. Please read the whole thing with amusement at the link below.

Source: The Independent

Edit: Here’s another link to Real Science. They think she can’t read a map. I agree.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming

One response to “Met Chief: UK Snomageddon ‘is merely a natural fluctuation’

  1. Edmh

    The FUTILITY of Man-made Climate Control by limiting CO2 emissions, watch:

    Why cant we get to the nub of the problem ? with NUMBERS NOT ADJECTIVES

    It is utterly futile to think that mankind can affect climate to any worthwhile extent. The numbers are very simple and are backed up by acceptance from a renowned UK government advisor, the US Department of Energy and many other reputable scientific minds.

    On average world temperature is ~+15 deg C. This is sustained by the atmospheric Greenhouse Effect ~33 deg C. Without the Greenhouse Effect the planet would be un-inhabitable at ~-18 deg C.
    Running the rough and ready numbers by translating the agents causing the Greenhouse Effect into degrees centigrade:
    • Water Vapour accounts for as much as 95% of the Greenhouse Effect = ~ 31.35 deg C
    • Other Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) account for 5% = ~1.65 deg C
    • CO2 is 75% of the remaining effect when accounting for the enhanced effects of Methane, Nitrous Oxide and other GHGs = ~1.24 deg C
    • Most CO2 in the atmosphere is natural, more than ~93%
    • Man-made CO2 is less than 7% of total atmospheric CO2 = ~0.087 deg C
    • UK’s contribution to World CO2 emissions is ~1.8% = 1.6 thousandths deg C

    Closing all the carbon economies of the Whole World could only ever achieve a virtually undetectable less than -0.09 deg C.

    And maximum efforts in the UK can only achieve an insignificant and immeasurable part of that. And whatever is said, outside Europe the rest of the world is not joining in.

    The probability is that any current global warming is not man-made as we are assured by Piers Corbyn and in any case such warming could be not be influenced by any remedial action taken by mankind however drastic.

    So if the numbers above are even close to the right ballpark, the prospect should be greeted with Unmitigated Joy:
    • concern over CO2 as a man-made pollutant can be discounted.
    • it is not necessary to damage the world’s economy to no purpose.
    • if warming were happening, it would lead to a more benign and healthy climate for all mankind.
    • any extra CO2 is already increasing the fertility and reducing water needs of all plant life and thus enhancing world food production.
    • a warmer climate, within natural variation, would provide a future of greater prosperity for human development and much more food for the growing world population. This has been well proven in the Roman and Medieval pasts and would now especially benefit the third world.

    This is not to say that the world should not be seeking more efficient ways of generating its energy, conserving its energy use and stopping damaging its environments. It remains absolutely clear that our planet is vastly damaged by many human activities such as:
    • environmental pollution.
    • over fishing.
    • forest clearance.
    • farming for bio-fuels.
    • and all other habitat destruction.

    And there is a real need to wean the world off the continued use of fossil fuels simply on the grounds of:
    • security of supply
    • increasing scarcity
    • rising costs
    • their use as the feedstock for industry rather than simply burning them.

    The French long-term energy strategy with its massive commitment to nuclear power is impressive, (85% of electricity generation). Even if one is concerned about CO2, Nuclear Energy pays off, French electricity prices and CO2 emissions / head are the lowest in the developed world.

    However in the light of the state of the current solar cycle, it seems that there is a real prospect of damaging cooling occurring in the near future for several decades as anticipated by Piers Corbyn. And as UK power stations face closure according to Green policies, the lights may well go out in the winter 2015 if not sooner.
    This is all because CO2 based Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming has become a state sponsored religion. And now after “Splattergate” thanks to the 10:10 organisation everyone worldwide now knows exactly how they think.

    Splattergate is classic NOBLE CAUSE CORRUPTION. It is probably the most egregious piece of publicity ever produced in the Man-made Global Warming cause. So any misrepresentation is valid in the Cause and any opposition however cogent or well qualified is routinely denigrated, publically ridiculed and as we now see literally terminated.

    And to carry on:
    If the capital cost of Nuclear power is ~£1.4 billion / gigawatt (according to Prof David MacKay) and the newly commissioned array off Thanet cost £0.78 billion and is rated at 0.300 gigawatt but even using a generous load factor of 35% is only capable of producing on average 0.105 gigawatt , it appears that in capital cost terms alone offshore wind costs ~£7.5 billion / gigawatt or more than 5 times the cost of the equivalent nuclear production.

    This of course ignores all the additional costs of the essential parallel backup generating capacity as well as the costs of continuing feed-in tariffs, estimated at about a further £1.2 billion over the 20 year life of the project. Paying just for starters more than 5 times as much for an unreliable energy source must make utter economic nonsense.
    Supporting renewable energy, especially wind farms, is something that this cash strapped government should re-examine very carefully.

    And just to add to the nonsense, Carbon Capture and Storage can only increase electricity costs and deprive the planet of a source of increased plant fertility. It is one of many suggestions, which might reduce CO2 emissions. All are expensive and all are pretty well pointless.

    In fact major government savings and greatly increased national prosperity could be achieved by terminating all CO2 related Government green activities and repealing the Climate Change Bill. Otherwise the UK is “standing into grave danger”.

    Future Energy Security (destroyed by both the last Government and by the current Coalition) is the foremost responsibility of a government to its citizens, more important than even than its Military Security.