« Climate Change Adviser | Main | Crackdown on Crack dealers »

The Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change - Blog it!

To Our Media’s Shame
“Why has the UK media, in pretty well all its forms, failed to report ‘The Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change’, signed in New York on March 4, 2008?” The meeting at which the ‘Declaration’ was agreed [‘The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change’, March 2 - March 4] was attended by over 500 people (scientists, economists, policy makers, etc.), with over 100 speakers delivering keynote addresses, or participating in panel discussions. Sadly, I think we know the answer, and it is one that reflects very badly on our supine UK media [the only exception of note appears to be The Sunday Telegraph, March 9: ‘Climate dissent grows hotter as chill deepens’]. If ever evidence were needed of the dangerous ‘control’ of our media by pernicious grand narratives, then this is surely it.

Luckily, we bloggers can break the deafening silence. Here, then, is the ‘Declaration’ for you to read for yourself, unadorned, unedited, and unfiltered by any media:

The Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

‘Global warming’ is not a global crisis

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

Recognising that the causes and extent of recently observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change. Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing, human suffering;

Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

Hereby declare:

That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity's real and serious problems.

That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.

That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate.

That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples.

That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.

Now, therefore, we recommend -

That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as An Inconvenient Truth.

That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008. [End of Declaration]

EU Referendum: Virtually unreported in Britain …
This is something that bloggers, in particular, could benefit from studying. Last week, I was talking to a "senior government advisor", who bemoaned the fact that the British political blogging scene had not followed the US example of leading the way in focused attacks on the establishment. Instead, he said, it was largely derivative, devoting most of its energies to commenting on media output - thus allowing the MSM to set the agenda.

If the British blogosphere is to have any real impact, we need to start shaping our own agenda. The "global warming fraud" is a good place to start.


"...warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder [weather]."

I took a university bioanthropology course recently
and the professor running that class told us that Humans
are suited more to warmer climates than cooler climates. It has a lot do with our physiology
being honed in a warm environment. Judging by what he said, in some ways, we are going to be better off if the climate gets slightly warmer. I mean it's common sense really. Who goes to the Arctic for a holiday? Not many people I know. Most people flock to a warmer place for their holidays. And what about things like vinyards in southern England?
I also took an astrology course and the professor running that said that the world will get warmer because of things like bitumin covered parking areas, i.e. black absorbs sunlight, and less ice, i.e. ice reflects heat back to space so less ice equals less heat back to space, and that fact that WE are cutting down trees,
but he didnt seem to think it was as worrying as the media "experts" were making out! The Earth's climate has always changed, it has never been still. How long have records been kept? I know they can use ice cores, dendrochronology and other research techniques now; but even so we just don't know much about Earth's history to predict the weather.

There is almost no doubt that we have entered a period of very quiesent sun spot activity - we may be entering a period equating to the Dalton Minimum or even the Maunder Minimum which was even colder. This winter's cold and snowfalls in Canada, USA, China and Central Asia - we even had snow in Jerusalem, might indicate that global cooling has already started and we could be in for a very cold next 30 years!

perhaps this was not reported because there is not a single person's name associated with it. Why is there no list of signatories? Like this is carries no weight at all. Moreover it is no more than a list of unsubstantiated assertions and opinions. Where are the arguments about validity of factual evidence or about physical mechanisms misunderstood, or references to articles in refereed journals? It could have been made up by three guys in a back room in a pub.

By the way, M Anderson, I wouldn't trust an astrology professor on a question like this. They're not scientists at all.

The full report can be found here... http://heartland.temp.siteexecutive.com/pdf/22835.pdf Interesting read.

I think the Manhattan Declaration is similar to the IPCC's Summary For Policymakers.

Warm weather means more energy in the atmosphere. This in turn means more storms, hurricanes, tornadoes etc.

Mr Wyatt is mistaken and as per usual for proponents of the new green movement speaking before looking intothe facts of the matter. Look up ICSC and you can see a comprehensive list of names of scientiss including their field of study. Most are more quoted in their individual fields than those involvedwith the IPCC. here is also a list of names of scientists who subscribe tothe declaration but were not there in person on 4th March. Names on the list are not to be taken lightly as many are eal heavy weights in the climate sciences.
there is also a list of scientists who are not involved i the fild but have studied the subject and have signed the declaration. The nmes are on searate lists.
The IPCC to this day refuses to show a list of scientiss with their field of specialty as this wouldmae all tooclear their erroneou claim that 2500 of the world "top" scientsts all agree in AGW.
Read this Mr Wyatt an weep.

Nigel is also mistaken about the hurricanes in a warmer world. Note that the world expert Emanuel of MIT has recently announced that following his recent studies he will have to renounce his formerly held view that a warmer world would cause an increase in intensity and number of hurricanes and tornados. He was one of the scientists relied on by Al Gore to support his wild claims.
The formations of storms relies on the temperature difference between the tropics and the poles. In a warmer world, according to Richard Lindzen of MIT there will be less storminess and less variability because of the reduction in this gradient. Please see Icecap for emerging news and papers on this topic. From here there are links to other sites which should shed more light on the subject than the British media has offered up until now.

Why are you "blasting the Bogusmongers and other assorted pondlife."?

Pondlife is fascinating.

Just to let you know...In the US, another Manhattan Declaration was released yesterday...This one concerns the rapidly increasing action against families, the preborn, the disabled, and against those of the Christian faith...

Just to let you know...In the US, another Manhattan Declaration was released yesterday...This one concerns the rapidly increasing action against families, the preborn, the disabled, and against those of the Christian faith...

Post a comment