catastrophism Data Omniclimate Policy Science Skepticism

Bali: Gambling the Present for an Unknown Future

Very wise words about the results of the Bali “climate deals” in December 2007, from Dr. Sonia Boehmer-Christiansen (University of Hull, UK), editor of the journal “Energy and Environment“:

What the Bali agreements (i.e. a small adaptation fund, more CDM projects/policies, more negotiations on targets and timetables; technology transfer) are likely to mean for international efforts is simple to predict for a long-time observer. Great rhetorical efforts will continue with little effective actionother [than] more centralization of state power – in most countries […]

many agendas and several regions are likely to benefit from developments of less carbon intensive economies and lifestyles. The political consequences of such attempted developments may nevertheless be disastrous where economic growth or prosperity is undermined […]

Food, water, education and health are already more urgent ‘real’ global problems than climatic changes. Our primary (and more arduous) responsibility therefore is to current generations, though politics favors the future. People alive today are expected to pay for the implementation of an agenda too little concerned with conflict resolution but based on fear derived from computer model predictions generated and used by institutions that cannot be absolved of political motivations, however honorable.

For scientific reasons, all climate change policymakers and activists might familiarize themselves with the many voices – admittedly not proclaiming consensus – that are critical of the IPCC ‘scientific consensus’. More efforts needs to be devoted to observing climatic reality, understanding climate and only then, perhaps, on preparing for adaptation to real change. In the meantime, there are enough real problems to solve.

The above is from the Roundtable Forum “Tackling Climate Change” at

AGW catastrophism Omniclimate Science Skepticism Sun

Corbyn Admits Being Wrong

The feeblest of minds will see this as a sign of failure.

The rest of us should instead take notice that WeatherAction’s forecasts can be and are at times falsified. The same cannot be said of the usual AGW predictions

Note 23 Jan from Piers Corbyn re letter 21 Jan and ‘on-line’ comments in The Times:

1. Our long range forecast for January particularly* in most of England and Wales has – exceptionally – been a failure for most of the month and two reasons for this are mentioned in the correctional update on our website One reason was to do with the timing of events originating on the sun, the other was a data transfer error. The consequence has been – and independent monitors have said – this is exceptionally the largest forecast error we have made for years. In view of our data transfer error we will compensate forecast subscribers appropriately although please note the terms and conditions do not give us any duty to so do.

(* For Scotland and parts of Northern England and Northern Ireland the often cold and snowy weather is more in line with our forecast for southward shifts of the jet stream at times – which we had expected to shift further).

2. Observers should note that our forecast never said this January would be ‘more like 1740’ (than 1987) and concerning the end November / start December storm period we never said gales of the severity of the 1703 windstorm. In both cases we clearly said the weather would NOT be as extreme as then. People who claim we said such must please quote sources and say by whom such mis-information has been put about and for what purpose.

3. It is noteworthy that Paul Simons did not feel confident enough that our actual forecast would go wrong to wait for it to do so; and instead chose to make a false statement about our forecast (of an “apocalyptic freeze” in the first week) which he could instantly denounce since it wasn’t physically possible for such to occur after such a short duration in the British Isles. This we find doubly unacceptable since Mr Simons was sent forecasts in advance and could read what we actually had said.

4. Objective independent measures (by academics, subscribers and weather bets) of our Weather Action long range forecasts show they are much better than chance – ie significantly skilled – and much better than any others available anywhere in the world. For more about proven skill and priase from subscribers visit eg our British or european website )

5. We are an advancing science and a proportion of forecasts will go wrong and subscribers – in farming, business and commerce – recognise this and stay with our forecasts for years because they are profitable for their business. Our succes and sales enable ongoing research to improve forecasts so now they more skilled and include more detail. Indeed application of our Solar Weather Technique has been extended in trials to other parts of the world (see eg re our first trial forecast for tropical cyclones in the Bay of Bengal which correctly predicted the Cyclone which became the terrible storm Sidr last year).

6. It is sad that some seek to misrepresent our work (other than noting genuine forecast errors in a fair minded way) rather than say attacking – if they have a driving desire to attack long range forecasts – forecasts from others which are made at public expense and were so misleading to UKplc (eg) over the summer. The reasons for such extremely churlish behaviour must surely be about something other than forecasts and I suggest often are more to do with the desire of proponents of ‘man made global warming’ to claim all weather extreme events as “theirs”. Our success at predicting extreme events and long periods of high risk of extreme weather variations using solar-based methods is not something they want to countenance.

Thank you, Piers Corbyn

Italiano UE

Lezione al Mondo dall’Unione (Europea) di Stati Altrimenti Poco Importanti

Scrivevo alcuni mesi fa: “Se la UE riuscira’ davvero ad accomodare in maniera razionale tanti Paesi con una tal varieta’ di esperienze, desideri e preoccupazioni […] trasformandosi in una specie di nuove, spontanee Nazioni Unite […] diventera’ allora il primo regalo all’Umanità da parte di un’Europa risorta piu’ pacifica.”

E infatti, ecco un articolo dall’International Herald Tribune del 22 gennaio 2008, a firma Stephen Castle: “Emulando la UE, alcuni Paesi uniscono le loro forze per avere una voce potente e non dispersa“:

“il tentativo dell’Europa di far convinvere 27 disparate nazioni in un blocco viene imitato nel mondo, dall’Asia all’Africa, con i vari Paesi a sperimentare nuovi modi di aumentare la loro capacita’ di influenza. [… ]

l’esperimento europeo di integrazione viene copiato con maggior successo dall’Associazione delle Nazioni Asiatiche Sudorientali ASEAN [con l’obiettivo di] un mercato unico entro 2015.

Anche l’Unione Africana, concepita nel 1999, anche più grande e men pratica con 53 membri, ha preso in prestito strutture della UE, compresa il suo apparato burocratico più influente, modellato sulla Commissione Europea e conosciuto come la Commissione dell’Unione Africana. Il sogno dell’America latina e’ avere qualcosa come l’UE [… ] ”

Ci sono alcune osservazioni nell’articolo secondo cui una struttura centralizzata dell’Unione sarebbe necessaria per realizzare l’obiettivo del “pensiero continentale”.

Non sono d’accordo: quello che e’ importante, è che tutti i membri della UE (e dell’AU e dell’ASEAN) realizzino che ciascuno di loro è troppo piccolo per avere alcuna importanza a confronto delle Potenze, gli USA, la Russia, la Cina, l’India, forse anche il Giappone.

La cooperazione allora sarà una conseguenza naturale di quella realizzazione, senza alcun’esigenza di coercizione.

Anzi, quella è la ragione principale che fa restare i Britannici ancora riluttanti ad entrare completamente nell’Unione, mentalmente e non solo formalmente: perché quello significherà accettare che i giorni dell’impero sono realmente una cosa del passato.

English EU Europe International Politics

Lessons to the World from Union of Otherwise Inconsequential Nations

I wrote a few months ago: “As a sort of grass-root United Nations, the EU could then become the first gift to Humanity by a more peaceful, re-born Europe“.

And there it is: “Emulating the EU, countries join forces to speak with power and focus” (Stephen Castle, IHT, January 22, 2008):

“Europe’s attempt to weld 27 disparate nations into one bloc is being imitated around the globe, from Asia to Africa, as countries experiment with new ways to maximize influence.

[…] the European experiment with integration is being copied most successfully by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, [aiming for] a single market by 2015.

The African Union, conceived in 1999, while bigger and more unwieldy with 53 members, also borrows from EU structures, including its most influential bureaucracy, modeled on the European Commission and known as the AU Commission. The Latin American dream is to have something like the EU. […]”

There are some comments in the article along the lines of having a more centralized EU structure to achieve the goal of continental thinking.

I do not see that as a must: what is important, is for all the EU (and AU, and ASEAN) members to realize each of them is too small to be of any consequence compared to the Powers called USA, Russia, China, India, maybe even Japan.

Co-operative behavior will then be a natural consequence of that realization, without any need for cohercion.

I still believe that is the main reason why the British are reluctant to fully enter the EU: because that will mean them accepting that the days of the Empire are really a thing of the past.