Books Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
Sir David King admits they got it wrong in another example of how the green blob trashes the planet while pretending to save it.
Cartoons by Josh
View Printer Friendly Version
The damaging emissions were oral.============
Channel4 TV News was just plain dangerous last night where Sir David was admitting the error on diesel. Channel4's lead-in story had someone with a thermal camera from http://www.flir.co.uk/home/ (product placement?) showing "pollution" they said was "Carbon". Everything that was "warm" including faces, windows, etc. were all lit up. They portrayed it as a "pollution detector". Then in the session where Sir David and others were interviewed by Matt Frei, they talked about the 40,000 deaths from air pollution (guess all those faces are dangerous?), showed pictures of children who were purposed to have asthma there in about "NOX" which they never said what was and I can only surmise it is Nitrogen Oxide (not something mentioned in the report on visible pollution seen by the camera). Matt Frie was ill-equipped and ill-informed to challenge anything anyone said with any degree of professionalism. Never did he query the legal limits on "pollution" vs. what is being emitted vs. what reduction would be if the taxes they advocate are put in place. Pitiful. We're heading to another cliff like lemmings.
It is time for a Climate Science Mis-selling Scandal to erupt in the media.
Wrong doers need to be forced into repayment of their debts
People proclaiming expertise outside their immediate specialty should be looked at closely - particularly if they deliver their views in the manner epitomised by David King.
Geronimo's comment citing Andrei Illarionov, former chief science adviser to President Putin tells you things about King's approach to the world of lesser people - that you will not see in British MSM.
For some reason he reminds me of the Aussie harridan Dr Helen Caldicott.
Note the red face and squinty eyes, signs of carbon monoxide poisoning. Do you think he might have been in that garage a little too long, just to prove a point about pollution?
Also notice the Green Blob on its way to the Arctic using diesel, to get to the only area where it can survive uncontrollable global warming (as predicted by the Chief Scientific Advisor.)
Two cartoons Josh: you are spoiling us.
David King's bloopers made it to R4 News.
Nothing about Mis-Selling of Climate Science, just oops about diesel.
Sir David Anthony King, FRS HonFREng is an Emeritus Professor in Physical Chemistry at the University of Cambridge, Director of the Collegio Carlo Alberto, Chancellor of the University of Liverpool and a senior scientific adviser to UBS. - Wikipedia
To which can now be added 'and wrong'.
When does the London Taxi Company relocate to Belgium?
A less mendacious title would be :
Billions in fines to be applied to better NOx catalysts after Volkswagen is caught lying to Labor chief scientist
That makes little sense, Mr Seitz – why should fines be applied to better NOx catalysts? (Though I suspect you actually meant “catalysers,” but, anyhooo…) If they are better, why penalise them?
As I have said elsewhere on this site, the government has enacted policies under the advice of various “experts.” Said advice is now back to haunt them, and they are now acting under the advice of another bunch of “experts.” Will they ever learn…?
@Martyn The Chinese owned London Taxi manufactures in Coventry electric cabs..I guess there's a big SUBSIDY in that
A professor of chemistry who didn't know that high temperature combustion with air leads to nitrogen oxides?
If this is the standard of 'scientist' that the Government relies on, then God save the Queen (but none of the rest of the government).
21 February 2017London Taxi Company waves good bye to diesel cabs The London Taxi Company LTC has announced that it has started the final production run of its last TX4 diesel cabs for UK taxi drivers.
Add knowledge of PGM catalyst prices to the list of dietary supplements to add to radical rodent chow.
VW made its Bad Move after having to pay hundreds of dollars a gram for the rhodium content of its cordierite ehaust catalyst carriers,
Meanwhile.....Michael M explores the North Pole region with his compatriots in search of the missing 'Hot Spot'. All at the expense of NOAH - not to be confused with NOAA - of course
https:// https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFTEZTuLRoM html
"cordierite ehaust catalyst carriers", are you attempting alliteration Russell? 3 out of 4 is not very good. Spelling and/or typing is pretty crap also.
Apr 6, 2017 at 4:08 AM | Russell
The EU set new rules and regulations based on advice from the French and German car manufacturers. The EU and UK adjusted tax policies to favour diesels, because Climate Scientists said diesel was better for the environment.
UK motorists bought diesels because there was a conspiracy of lies by car manufacturers, climate scientists, the Green Blob, UK and EU. Those that spent money on diesels are now aggrieved.
Who destroyed the trust in EU, "Science", Climate Science? Has there been fraud and corruption, that people striving to be "Green", are now being penalised for?
You may not be aware, but Volkswagen is the Volkswagen Audi Group, making Audi and Porsche, but also Seat (Spain) Skoda (Czech) amongst others. Their cars are probably the most reliable produced within the EU, right across the price range, and employ 10s of thousands in various countries, not just Germany.
If "Volkswagen" have been naughty, I am not defending them. They make very good cars, and loads of people across the EU may lose their jobs, and that is on top of all those who bought Volkswagen for quality, reliability and low depreciation.
The EU and Climate Scientists have been very naughty, and now stupid. I am not defending them either. At least in the UK we are getting rid of the EU, and hopefully Climate Scientists in due course.
Sir David King is an expert, we should all trust, because he has lots of qualifications? Mann said something similar. Honest Scientists are now learning not to trust anything linked to Climate Science, unfortunately, the Taxpaying Public are assuming all Scientists are equally untrustworthy and unreliable.
The sooner Climate Scientists are struck off the Taxpayers payroll the better. The UK Taxpayers do not want to pay for those who are 97% wrong.
One thing modern Diesels are good at is removal of particulates. The tailpipe on my last Diesel car was clean and a wipe of the inside produced just a smear of grey. My current petrol-driven car, however, has a sooty black tailpipe. Switching to petrol isn't necessarily a problem-free option?
Mr Seitz, could you please explain why knowledge of PGM catalyst prices is required for this discussion?
While we about it, perhaps you could also explain exactly how a catalyst works – the last I heard was: “Because it does!” Like gravity and magnetism, there is an undeniable effect, but there has yet, to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge, been no explanation of how it does it.
Can't we all just blame VW and discount the costs of cleaning up diesels against the £50Bn Brexit charge?
In 2004 Dave King went to Moscow with the Bliar and gave a speech to Russian climate scientists. He claimed that Mt. Kilimanjaro was losing its snow cap because of global warming. In question time Russia's top expert angrily told King that he was very wrong because satellites showed cooling and the real reason was deforestation of the mountain slopes, reducing humidity.
Hence loss of snow cover was sublimation of ice to water vapour: Dave King angrily flounced out of the meeting. The interpretation of his present behaviour is that like most senior climate alchemists he is trying to find an honourable escape route as the IPCC/GISS science collapses. This will last another 18 months or so when the only people left will be those who have nailed their views to the mast too early and with excessively strong fastenings. Wadham comes to mind.
It's fascinating to compare this with the collapse of the Phlogiston Hypothesis when it too was confronted with strong negative experimental proof - the gravimetric work of Antoine Lavoisier. The present experimental problem is the OCO-2 satellite showing development of CO2 sinks in the N. Atlantic and over central Russian forests, and Argo buoys showing ocean cooling. NOAA has tried to restrict publicity but that approach has failed completely now Trump has arrived.
Far too much research these days concentrates on one small aspect of a particular issue and not the wider situation.In a totally different area, research by heart specialists advocates quite a low level of salt each day as being good for the heart. Bur a more recent US report suggests that other organs require at least double this figure.This attitude seems to be typical of so much modern research, never look at the possible adverse affects elsewhere of what you are proposing.
So climate change policy has basically encouraged a switch from petrol to diesel engined vehicles in order to reduce CO2 emissions, and also penalised us all with higher taxation on CO2 emissions.
The consequence of this policy has been to cause premature deaths of thousands of real people in order to try and save people from some putative harm in the future. And note that even if climate policies were fully enforced the calculated effect is trivial (EPA admitted US contribution might change the temperature by 0.01 degC in 2100; Lomberg pointed out at the time that a fully implemented Kyoto treaty would shift the dangerous warming from 2100 to 2106).
Its political posturing and moral virtue signalling of the worst possible kind. The green movement has completely lost the plot and are now causing actual harm to real people, whilst purportedly "saving" people from imaginary threats in the future.
Quite frankly its just insane.
Waaay off topic but not sure how to go about this: I need to briefly have contact with those who come here who consider themselves leftists (even socialists) who are Skeptics. I am currently in a quote-meme war with a person who wants everyone to believe that 'rightist nationalists' are the only ones who oppose the 'consensus.'
Apr 6, 2017 at 10:03 AM | steveta_uk
Why should we blame VW? They just did what the EU wanted them to do.
Why not decline the entire £50Bn Brexit Charge? They caused so many problems, and the £50Bn will only be used to carry on causing more for the rest of the EU.
The EU Countries have all been on austerity budgets for one reason or another. The EU needs to demonstrate it is financially stable, and capable of spending other people's money responsibly, just as it insisted Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain to do. The EU might as well learn about audited accounts and austerity now.
@Climate Otter we skeptics deal with the issues one by oneThey the dogmatists deal with things in a tribal way.So preach tolerance at the same time as dismissing peoples views just cos they are not of the right tribe.At same time many rightists preach alarmism and often seem to benefit from subsidy ££s
VW DID NOT CHEAT. They passed the required tests 'AS SPECIFIED'. If those who specified the tests had the SLIGHTEST clue in their brain as to how normal humans operate, we wouldn't be in this position, because no diesel would ever have been deemed acceptable.SimonJ
The UK msm like to take a bash at Donald Trump. As he has stuck his neck out with regard to cagw, the media now use that as a way of belittling the potus.
I guess this is not only shutting the gate after the horse has bolted - but also disappeared over the horizon...
HOWEVER - why have we in the UK (and the Other Lot over the Channel) not followed the USA - and required diesel vehicles (trucks; buses) to have the exhaust pipe at high level, where there is a greater chance of particulates dispersing..?
Apart from anything else, isn't there a sort of primitive thrill in watching a Kenworth or Peterbilt hammering down the interstate at seventyfive with a sort of haze billowing out of their twin smokestacks..?
Apr 6, 2017 at 1:02 PM | sherlock1
With my practical experience of diesel yacht engines, I have always understood that the black smoke and sooty deposits on the rear of yachts and vehicles, resulted from incomplete combustion of the diesel fuel, in other words, the engine is not running efficiently, due to lack of correct maintenance, and/or user error.
The diesel engines I am used to, have NO electronic gizmos or engine management chips, reliability and simplicity are the highest priority at sea.
Sticking a turbo on a diesel has numerous benefits for power and economy. Putting an electronic chip into the control system allowed parameters to be varied, with the click of a mouse. VAG software allowed the car to sense when it was being tested for emissions, and adjust for the best test result. Thereafter, it adjusted for best performance and/or economy on the road, as demanded by purchasers.
VAG did cheat. How many others have been cheating? Why did it take the US authorities to rumble what EU authorities had been complicit in creating, and hadn't found, despite warnings?
I am not convinced by the "Medical Evidence". It is tainted by the smear of Green Blob fingerprints. Sir David King has admitted being wrong before, why should we trust him to be right now? He has already caused the waste of £Billions. If the figures for all the extra deaths due to diesel are correct (doubtful) then how many are Sir David and his Collaborators of the Green Blob going to accept responsibility for?
Is your image of a big thundering US Truck recent? I don't think modern ones would be allowed visible emissions from multiple stackpipes, no matter what emotions they stir up.
This is a good listen to understand that Sir David the Diesel King is still failing to dig into the science and understand what is going on.
golf charlie (Apr 6, 2017 at 2:40 PM), you are correct that black smoke from a diesel is a sign of incomplete combustion and is most prevalent during transient conditions (e.g. hard acceleration). However, modern design and control methods (e.g. electronic engine management, direct injection, catalytic converters and particulate filters) have effectively eliminated this from cars since more than a decade.
Although ozone and NOx emissions still remain problematic, ‘selective catalytic reduction’ (SCR) technology, which injects ammonia via via AdBlue/DEF (a 1:2 parts mixture of urea and water) into the exhaust, can reduce these significantly and are fitted to most modern cars to meet the Euro 6 standard…http://writingaboutcars.com/is-there-an-alternative-to-diesel-exhaust-fluid-in-srcs/
Concerning the latest medical evidence, Sunday Politics did an excellent job of putting things into perspective a few months ago…http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04lt97v…with old ‘brillo’ doing a rather effective job embarrassing the director of Greenpeace with real-world facts…http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04lt9dx
Dave Salt, tomo others?
thank you for the extra info.
If vegetable oil is used, instead of "diesel" as a fuel, will the same levels of NOX, particulates etc be produced?
I note your comments about AdBlue etc, but are the alleged problems due to the fuel used, or the nature of compression ignition?
BioDiesel was going to save the world. It has been a failure, causing increased food shortages and prices. Are BioFuel emissions any safer or worse for the Green Blob's lungs?
Brillo is the only interviewer on TV worth listening to – he challenges whoever is on his show, and does his homework. The director of Greenpi$$ falls back on the standard “think of the children!” (Several times, too, especially when Brillo puts him on the ropes.) He doesn’t even seem to know or understand the pap that his own organisation is pumping out. If you want to stop real pollution, shut down all such as Groanpi$$ and Enemies of the People; that is the sort of manure that will definitely NOT help your roses.
Successful knee jerk strong-arming over vehicle CO2 emissions has been followed up by calls for similar regarding the diesels Government previously wanted us to buy. It should not be overlooked that King is actually saying 'We got it wrong before, but believe us that we are right now'.
Even the diesels that had defeat devices are about as clean as diesels were in around 2000, such is the pace at which emissions standards have been imposed on manufacturers and air quality limits imposed on governments, and I don't remember 2000 era diesels being bad. Perhaps our betters believed people would change their cars more often than they have. Perhaps they believed the testing conditions were accurate reconstruction of daily driving. Or maybe they were just ignorant as these people seem to keep turning out to be.
The main problem is the state keeps trying to pick winners and elbow consumers in particular directions based on shoddy science. This particular particulate panic is just another in a long line of scares. The claims about extra deaths is a weak one. EPA human trials involving participants breathing in high levels of fine particulates and NOx emissions did not show a link between emissions and ill health. The figure of 40k extra deaths in the UK is a statistical 'equivalent' which could also be described as 'a few days shorter lifespan for everyone'.
The present experimental problem is the OCO-2 satellite showing development of CO2 sinks in the N. Atlantic and over central Russian forests, and Argo buoys showing ocean cooling. NOAA has tried to restrict publicity but that approach has failed completely now Trump has arrived.
Quite ... I am a little bit obsessive about following OCO-2 and had heard stuff about the Argo data - do you have any links / pointers that might lead some small enlightenment on the topic of NOAA tinkering with the data? fwiw I have used customised Argo buoys in a work environment but never looked at the bigger picture - are they simply keeping schtum about inconvenient data - or are they "correcting" it?
The figure of 40k extra deaths in the UK is a statistical 'equivalent' which could also be described as 'a few days shorter lifespan for everyone'.
Apr 6, 2017 at 4:29 PM | Gareth
How many of these deaths should Sir David King accept responsibility for? Bearing in mind that James Hansen referred to trains transporting coal to power stations as "Death Trains", as reported by The Guardian in Feb 2009 (before ClimateGate)
I feel confident that if the 40k deaths were used against the Green Blob, the precise figure would reduce to "Not Statistically Significant".
golf charlie (Apr 6, 2017 at 4:19 PM), I believe that the amount of NOx produced is primarily a function of the pressure inside the combustion chamber, rather that the fuel type. It is therefore a direct consequence of compression ignition mechanism, which is the basis of the Diesel cycle.
Note that jet engines also have significant NOx emissions but are not such a direct issue for human health because of where they mainly operate, though their indirect effects on atmospheric chemistry may well be a legitimate concern.
Apr 6, 2017 at 6:13 PM | Dave Salt
Thank you for that. So all the stuff about buses running on chip fat, and purpose grown BioDiesel at detrimental cost to food supply/production and third world famine is another Green con? (Apart from the fuel not coming from a hole in the ground)
The cost in human lives of producing BioDiesel has yet to be guessed at. Could Sir David King supply yet another guess, incorrect or irresponsible as he likes?
NOx formation - a primer.
I tinkered with bio-diesel in the early 90s producing some hundreds of litres from waste cooking fat where my biochemistry skills came in handy. Exploring the topic background I discovered at the time that there was a rule of thumb for biodiesel production compared to fossil diesel. If you take the acknowledged best source plants for vegetable oil and plant the entire cultivable areas of the planet with them you end up with no food and about 20% of the annual fossil fuel consumption is replaced. Obviously there's considerable margin for error in the biofuel arithmetic but the scale of it seemed likely to me.
The farcical US-EPA bioethanol, the subsidised digesters, Drax, Norn Iron RHI etc., etc. shows the eco-loons and their supporters to be innumerate, corrupt and stubbornly ignorant. Having paid clowns like King around to anoint these follies with his "high status blessings" just rubs the salt in.
The "40k deaths a year" number is actual, undiluted BS and it should be uncompromisingly challenged at every opportunity when it is wheeled out by BS-ing creeps that are touting it at the moment. As Tony Frew points out the leaps of logic alone in the claim are extremely contrived and I'd say repeating them as gospel should have Sadiq laughed out of public life - either he is profoundly stupid or he is a liar FFS they're claiming this is "statistics" - when it's not - it's made up self serving kerrapp - oops.... back to the King zone.
@tomo: the 'diesel kills 40,000 people per annum' has apparently been contrived to shift public opinion from rapidly debunked climate alchemy. We also have the return of the Cold War.
The original Cold War was also contrived. I know this because when I worked in Moscow 25 years ago for a multinational, which since 957 had imported enriched uranium to fuel America's nuclear power stations, I had to keep quiet about another multinational I had worked for previously which had co-created the Canadian-Russian friendship institute.
International politics is carefully contrived by the Globalist Banks, Multinationals and a few top politicians. The past purpose was to spread capitalism. The new purpose is to spread fascism by disguising it as socialism and importing Moslems to initiate civil war in the West.
How did this thing ever get legs? And, if people like Sadiq Khan, truly believe this nonsense, why are they proposing to allow people to drive in places like London for a price. I have yet to hear any interviewer ask that question.
This is a link to a video clip from Sunday Politics about diesels etc.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1YAloJNuUI&feature=youtu.be
Also, why are people (like me), brought up in a world where diesels were unfiltered etc. living longer than ever?
We are living in very strange times.
Apr 6, 2017 at 7:47 PM | tomo
Thank you for that. The Guardian reported the problem in 2008
Since then, they have blamed wars and famines on Global Warming, and lost credibility.
But the final paragraph of the article is a quote from DR DAVID KING, as a Government Advisor. Oh Dear.
Let's just leave GC ,RR , and the other acolytes to outstultify each other for a w while
Apr 7, 2017 at 6:45 AM | Russell
Don't bury your head in the sand for too long, Climate Science may be all over.
Do you think The Guardian and Dr David King were wrong in 2008, or are you Denying that Climate Science has led to famine and deaths?
vvussell, here is Dr David King being quoted in The Guardian from 2008
"It is clear that some biofuels have huge impacts on food prices," said Dr David King, the government's former chief scientific adviser, last night. "All we are doing by supporting these is subsidising higher food prices, while doing nothing to tackle climate change."
What should we have done in 2008 to stop the Global Warming, that has not happened anyway? Dr/Sir David King produced the wrong prescription, for a non existent problem, that has caused how many deaths? He was correct about it not tackling "climate change".
Some people still think Climate Science is worth wasting £billion$ on. 97% of them profit out of Climate Science.
King continues his work as a lobbyist posing as a scientist.
ClimateOtter Apr 6, 2017 at 11:11 AM The majority of climate sceptics who post on this and other sceptical sites are not left wing, however there are a few who get into all sorts of scrapes because of their views. It is well known here that I am one such.
It is well known here that I am one such.
Apr 7, 2017 at 11:18 AM | Supertroll
And your contributions are all the more valuable as a result. Climate Science HAS conspired with Politicians of almost all political colours, though those from the " Centre to Leftish" HAVE been the most gullible. It is good to know that those from the Centre to Leftish side are not all gullible sheep.
I am grateful for what UKIP achieved, but never voted for them. A year ago, I did not see US Democrats as a bunch of lying crooks trying to force through an unstable candidate as President, but I am happy the US ended up with the better option.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.