In the week a UN study warned of dire consequences for the planet, predicting a 6-deg. rise in the Earth's temperature, Tory climate-sceptics gather in Europe.
Conservative MEP Roger Helmer is today hosting a “climate sceptics’ conference” in Brussels. The news once again undermines David Cameron’s claims to that the electorate can “Vote Blue, Go Green“.
James Delingpole, wrote yesterday on his Telegraph blog, that:
“Today I’m off on the Eurostar to Brussels (”a carbon neutral journey” it boasts on my ticket – which rather makes me wish I were flying instead) to speak at the European Parliament on Climate Change.
“No, don’t worry. The Goreistas haven’t got to me. It’s a sceptics’ conference – Have Humans Changed Climate? – being staged tomorrow by Tory MEP Roger Helmer. Many of my science and eco-heroes will be there, including Patrick Moore (the co-founder of Greenpeace who subsequently bailed when the charity turned far too red), Prof Fred Singer (who’ll be talking on Can We Trust The IPCC?) and Professor Ross McKitrick (who famously helped expose the notorious Hockey Stick curve).”
Sessions at the conference include “Why can’t we trust IPCC?”, “How the Sun and its solar winds affects our climate” and “Media Bias, Climate Alarmism and the Rise of the New Media.”
In his “Straight Talking – September 2009” newsletter, Helmer writes:
“Far too often there is an assumption that everyone is in agreement on the climate change issue; I am pleased to be able to go some way to demonstrating that that is simply not so. I shall keep you posted on the event.”
The climate sceptics conference comes in the same week as the warnings from the UN’s Global Carbon Project study of a six-degree rise in the Earth’s temperature this century, which could lead to a climate not seen for 100 million years, extinctising almost all life and reducing humanity to a few struggling groups living near the poles
This statement will, no doubt, concern David Cameron who said in his conference speech, “The dangers of climate change are stark and very real. If we don’t act now, and act quickly, we could face disaster.”
The conference comes on the back of news this morning that shadow health secretary, Andrew Lansley, has campaigned against a wind farm close to his Cambridgeshire South constituency on the spurious grounds of noise pollution.
Minister of State for Energy, Joan Ruddock told Left Foot Forward:
“While serious politicians wrestle with getting a deal to tackle climate change in Copenhagen, David Cameron lets one of his MEPs convene a meeting of climate change sceptics. It shows how two-faced the Tories really are on climate issues. The Tories are out of step with the science and the politics and would put all our efforts to tackle climate change at risk.”
UPDATE 4:25
Speaking from Beijing, former Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott has just said:
“Who are the real Tories? David Cameron may talk green but the Tories either deny climate change is happening or don’t want to deal with it. Cameron lets one of his MEPs get a motley crew of sceptics together while one of his key allies Andrew Lansley says in Not In My Constituency about wind power.
“The world has only a few weeks to get a deal at Copenhagen to tackle Climate change and the Tories are turning their backs on the truth. Here in Beijing the Chinese understand the challenge of climate change and want to tackle it.
“The Tories would leave us left behind not just in Europe on this but across the world.”
UPDATE 10.08 19/11
Political Scrapbook reveal that “Star of Tory climate change conference [Fred Singer] was paid to deny effects of passive smoking”.
Other speakers include Ross McKitrick, a libertarian with a track record of broader anti-environmentalism; Fred Goldberg, an expert in welding technology who claims that polar bears are increasing in number; and Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist who has only published three research papers in peer-reviewed journals, none on human-induced climate change.
38 Responses to “Tory MEP hosts “climate sceptics'” conference”
Henry
Well said, Richard Blogger. I’m bored of hearing uninformed & dogmatic opinions on climate change from people who have absolutely no scientific qualifications.
Anon E Mouse
Richard Blogger – when did it become a crime to hold an opinion that’s different to yours? Same question – you didn’t answer it above.
Semiconductor physics has nothing to do with Climate Change – I’m an electronics design engineer with qualifications in marine engineering – so what?
You clearly “don’t do science” Richard, if you did you would explain why the world gets colder and why the flawed science (it’s only opinion) does not include solar radiation, planet absorption of CO2, the O3 depletion in the ozone layer, natural effects of the planet and on and on.
As a person involved in a job involving engineering you should know better I’m afraid.
Henry – Since Richard Blogger states clearly he is not a scientist involved in this and has no applicable skillset here why waste bandwidth with that pointless comment?
Ian Bolton
Come on Anon, not all science is based on the way the planet functions but it’s safe to say physics is classed as a science. What if he has a science degree? Would Richard Blogger then be able to unlock this mystery? You seem so sure, and seem to be almost preaching, that our climate change/CO2 issue isn’t man made. Fair enough, but where’s you evidence for that side of the argument. Neither can be proved yet as we have no complete evidence from REAL scientists, so maybe you’re getting ahead of yourself. I’m a graphic designer, so why should i have any opinion on such matters anyway? I’m not a scientist.
Anon E Mouse
Ian – the point I make is that without a scrap of evidence the public are immediately taxed on the basis of flawed science.
El Nino and La Nina are ignored by these “climate-change-experts”. If you email them they say that doesn’t affect the overall climate. What kind of answer is that?
My point about Richard Blogger is that as an engineer/physicist/scientist – whatever, he should have proof before giving a definitive answer.
He doesn’t know – no one does for certain and therefore he should say:
“Since there is no evidence to prove the case, I have studied the available scientific opinions and with the following caveats (eg the heat from the sun is not included etc) it is my belief that man made CO2 may cause global warming”.
Anything else cannot be stated and with a discipline employed by a engineer/physicist/scientist he is being disingenuous if he claims otherwise.
Ian Bolton
I guess Richard was just stating that without any scientific facts everything is just theory. Some people go on faith, and believe only in what they feel is right (which is a very stupid). When we have people who openly deny global warming, without facts, it breeds issues of trust and our basic human rights become questionable.
I completely understand what you mean though. If we are given no evidence then what are we supposed to believe? The only opinion of the matter I have is that I find it frustrating we are having CO2 emissions adverts on TV, some of which are a bit shocking, and a majority of the people in the country will not even question the motives.