Sunday, 3 January 2016

John Gibbons - Are winters getting colder or warmer ?

John Gibbons, the climate alarmist at An Taisce seems to be confused as to whether Climate Change is causing winters in Ireland to get warmer or cooler.

Compare these two statements made on his blog, one from 2010 and the other from 2015:

2010 Quote - John Gibbons :

“First, the good news: despite concerns, the Gulf Stream, the powerful current that transfers vast amounts of heat from the equator to north-western Europe, does not appear to be faltering. Were it to stop entirely, average winter temperatures in Ireland would plummet by 5 degrees C, meaning the current freeze would be a regular fixture for several months every year.These anomalies could triple the probability of cold winter extremes in Europe and northern Asia,” according to Vladimir Petoukhov, lead author of the study. “Recent severe winters like last year’s or the one of 2005-06 do not conflict with the global warming picture, but rather supplement it.”

"I invite you to read this sub-section in full. It confirms that Ireland’s average air temperature has risen by 0.8C in the last century, and that this has already impacted, for instance, the growing season. By mid-century, is says, all seasons are likely to be 1-1.5 warmer, but it’s not all doom and gloom by any means: “Milder winters will lead to a reduction in winter mortality due to fewer cold spells but the increasing likelihood of heatwaves and hot days (days over 30 °C) may have the opposite effect in summer.”
So there you have it - we are going to have severely cold and milder winters at the same time. 

While Gibbons is perfectly entitled to believe in whatever he likes, the worrying thing is that the building of more wind farms and Climate Bills which drive up carbon taxes are both justified by this contradictory "science".

And the Irish media, like in the days of the Celtic Tiger, are driving the bandwagons off the cliff.


  1. In Czech, the temperatures is minus 15. Hot water must be placed on aerplane wings before lift off.

  2. The evidence is that co2 levels in the atmosphere follows temperature. co2 does not drive temperature. Warmers have been fiddling data with the connivance of the media

  3. Climate alarmists have removed the data from the warm period between 850 to 1250. At the very least you would expect this to be put back in and the figures adjusted. No way, its left there

  4. Even if there is something to warming, how long will the voting public support paying all the cost? In the 1960's it was the threat of nuclear war, but I don't hear much about it nowadays, then is was AIDS, then the Dot Com scare, then Abola and now Global Warming. As any warming will be a slow process extending beyond the lives of all humans now born, will governments be able to sustain its demonisation of fossil fuel and exhalation of renewables? The warming scare began with Al Gore's video "The Inconvenient Truth" about 2006 and is now 10 years old, it's mature. I would pick a ballpark of 12 years per scare with only one being dominant at any time. It is noteworthy the pro warming politicians do not appear to have very long careers. So this begs the question, could we profit from long and short betting against the climate change industry?

    I ask you to go now and search Google Paul Paulson Wikipedia He made 4 Billion dollars betting against the US sub - prime mortgage racket. Governments tried to halt the banking collapse, but they could not. If we believe wind and solar energy is a scam and climate change market intervention cannot be sustained, why can we not bet against it? More later I hope.

  5. Now Google search "I'm putting my money where my mouth is and betting against climate change". The problem is most people don't understand how the financial markets work, but there are some parts of it not too hard to understand. There are 3 types of people effected by economic collapses. 1) The ordinary folk who are always screwed. 2) Buccaneer investors who are usually escape and 1) Vulture funds. In respect of No 2, government will always try to put their debt onto No 1, as happened in the Irish banking collapse. However, No 3 (Vulture funds) operate independently. It is the most pure form of investment and if you make a Billion, you can always share it with the less well off clearing your conscience. Most people do not have enough money to invest in a PaulPaulson type fund, but if resources could be pooled, it could be a money maker. The cost of the warming scare is now 1.5 trillion dollars = on line shopping. But there is nothing tangible for ordinary folk for this money spent. Could those ordinary folk (or the cleverest among them) bet against this attempt to rob them without exposing themselves to unacceptable risk? It could be worth looking into. "One man's loss is another man's gain" was a very old saying.