Ed Davey “Climate Change Science Is Irrefutable”

Liberal Democrat Climate Fool Ed Davey believes that Climate Science if irrefutable.

Liberal Democrat Climate Fool Ed Davey believes that Climate Science is irrefutable.

This would be funny, or possibly just plain boring if it were one of the usual Green suspects like Ban Ki-Moon, Connie Hedegaard, Christiana Figueres or one the banshee wailing NGO’s, instead it is a British Government minister who has a very big say in the energy mix and energy security of Britain.

Ed Davey is the replacement Liberal Democrat Climate Change secretary in the lack lustre coalition government that is currently compounding the damage done to the country by the previous Labour Regime of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Davey’s predecessor as Climate Change secretary, Liberal Democrat Chris Huhne has gone, guilty of the serious crime of Perverting the Course of Justice, Huhne is currently awaiting what is most likely a custodial prison sentence.

Huhne in his day was a formidable politician, a devout member of the Church of Climatology, at the annual UN Climate Circus meetings Huhne could usually be found with his nose up Connie Hedegaard’s butt, busily trying to give away more money that Britain did not have.

Davey by comparison to Huhne is a glove puppet, more akin to one operated by a limp wristed puppeteer come to think of it, Davey is a political lightweight so it is not surprising he should choose to make his irrefutable science claims to an audience of the converted:

Climate science is “irrefutable” and “screams out from decade upon decade of research” UK Energy and Climate Secretary Ed Davey will tell an audience at the Royal Society later today.

And in a direct attack on climate sceptics who believe man made global warming is at best overblown or at worst a hoax, Davey will argue they are risking their children’s futures by slowing efforts to cut emissions.

The Royal Society, a once great scientific institution, now like the BBC just another mouth piece for Green hysteria and junk science, and just like the BBC the Royal Society has decided that the debate on climate change is over. James Delingpole in his blog The Royal Society is a joke:

But then, May knew he was right. Apparently, at dinner once he leant across and said to Roger Harrabin:

‘I am the President of the Royal Society, and I am telling you the debate on climate change is over’.

May’s successor, Lord Rees continued this fine tradition. As well as acting as an amen corner for the (widely discredited) Stern Report, Rees presided over a campaign accusing ExxonMobil of funding sceptics, and, perhaps, most disgracefully, sought to discredit the research of Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark.

As Climate Religion continues its slide off the political and public consciousness radar, there is an increasing trend by the warming alarmists cooling deniers to hark back to the halcyon days of the Global Warming scam, dust off the old religious tomes of doom and environmental holocaust, and present them with fresh urgency and doubtless a new Armageddon date, to replace the last predicted Armageddon date that failed to happen.

“You know, when I am confronted by some of the most dogmatic and blinkered people who deny that climate change is happening, I am reminded of the sentiment of the famous USA Today cartoon,” he will say.

“If we really are wrong about climate change, we will have created a better world for nothing.

The problem is it will not be for nothing, every single Green idea be it renewable energy, electric vehicles, carbon capture and storage or Carbon trading does not work. Each idea is both technologically and financially not viable, all attract huge subsidies, all have failed because politicians refuse to learn a simple lesson, consumers create markets not politicians.

“In reality, those who deny climate change and demand a halt to emissions reduction and mitigation work, want us to take a huge gamble with the future of every human being on the planet, every future human being, our children and grandchildren, and every other living species.”

In reality those that pretend there is still Global Warming and insist on saving the world from a problem that does not exist, with solutions that patently do not work are taking the huge gamble with all our futures.

There has been no statistically significant warming for 16 years:

Late last year the British Met Office released data showing no statistically significant warming for 16 years. Another data set from the Remote Sensing System’s Microwave Sounding Units even shows a slight cooling since 1997, although, again, it’s not statistically significant.

Yes, Dr Emerson could find yet other measurements showing a slight warming over that time, but not one of the main tools for measuring the world’s temperature shows any rise since then that is statistically significant.

“Not statistically significant” means the trend is so slight scientists don’t know whether it’s just caused by accident or background “noise“.

Davey knows this, the Royal Society know it as well, everyone involved in the Great Global Warming boondoggle knows what not statistically significant means, but with the heady mix of power and money, linked to a Green political agenda that doubles up as a belief system do not expect observed empirical evidence to win out over religious fervor, power and money anytime soon.

About Tory Aardvark

Climate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. http://toryaardvark.com @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook

Posted on February 12, 2013, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Carbon Capture and Storage, Carbon trading, Church Of Climatology, Climate Change, Extreme Weather Events, Fear, Global Warming, Green Lies, Junk Science, ManBearPig, Oh FFS, Wind Power and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. And then there’s Gummer, now Chairman of the Committee on Climate Change. A Council Member of the marxist one world World Future Council from Dec 2011 to Dec 2012, but did not bother declaring it in his Parliamentary Register of Interests, or to the kind chaps at DECC who offered him the job at “1000/day.


  2. I’d go along with every word this PPE graduate says (doubtless written by a Common Purpose civil servant green luvvie), if either of them could explain this one ugly fact which destroys their beautiful theory.

    NB: The lines are drawn using the warmies’ own ‘adjusted’ data and there is still no proven causation linking global temperature to CO2 ppm.


    • Hi Andrew, do you have that graph going out to 2012?

      I ask because it is the clearest exposition of these facts that I have seen so far.

  3. “If we really are wrong about climate change, we will have created a better world for nothing.”

    It won’t be a better world either. Countryside littered with dead windmills, vast areas of China and Africa left as toxic wastelands having provided the rare earth metals for the windmills, half the Amazon reduced to failed bio-fuel plantations, every river clogged with a non-feasible dam, a derelict solar farm within walking distance of every town, energy costs at five times what they are now causing mass poverty…

    • Yes, I always ask “a better world how?” because what some of these extremists consider to be better we may well feel is much worse. Misguided even, judging by their hatred for all of us living while wringing their hands with concern for “the children”.

  4. I have only now started reading your posts ?
    My impression of your site is not good and i am not referring to your opinions but your presentation which is not acceptable to any intelligent person ?
    Why you may ask well first the non professional language second your lack of knowledge of the subjects you write about and your hostility ?
    Why do you not employ professional scientists to at least present your arguments logically because in most matters there is a debate at some level ?

    • Are you for real?

      Most of us, including Tory, rather like the layout, content, context and hostility. I would suggest you are in the minority and have added nothing at all to the debate.

  5. Hugh wells up with baby tears because we won’t lower ourselves to his level.


  1. Pingback: Wow! CO2 Makes Volcanos Erupt « Tory Aardvark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: