Hello,

My name is Wim Vos and as my name might reveal have close connections with The Netherlands. Also do I have connection with Cambridge, and that is why I came to contribute to this website.

Finding many people in the UK strongly believe that the Changing Climate is caused by human interference, the general attitude in The Netherlands is more relaxed to one of climate change is caused by natural phenomena where it is not possible to influence anything.

So how is it possible the occupants of two countries so close together have such a difference of opinion?
I have dug into this difference in attitude and, given the opportunity, will publish my findings here.

It is not my purpose to create more separation but bring people together.
What all of us have in common is a deep longing for ourselves and our children to come home to a healthy planet.

I will add to this on a regular basis and invite you to contact me for more information.

Wim

Skroll throught the page or use this menu:
What is Climate?
Confessions of the Baroness Bryony Worthington who Drafted the Climate Change Bill
Don't Sell Your Coat
CO2 Regulation: The Essence of Immorality
The Maldives Are Not Sinking
Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues
Seeing is Believing
Other planets heat up as well
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Interglacial Warmth
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition
COP17 Global Day of Action
Presented to Climate Change Conference in Durban
2012: What's REALLY going to happen?
Al Gore's Lies Exposed By Congress
Eco-terrorism fantasy film No Pressure
Watermelons
What we are not being told about the climate
Global Warming: How It All Began

What is Climate?

To be able to understand climate change, we need to be able to understand climate. What is is? How it works? Here we explain what climate is and how different factors affect it
Bekijk video op YouTube

Confessions of the Baroness Bryony Worthington who Drafted the Climate Change Bill.

Bryony has been working on climate change for the last decade - she wrote the first report in the UK calling for the introduction of 'carbon budgets', was the brains behind the Friends of the Earth 'Big Ask' campaign, and helped the UK Government launch its first public awareness campaign
Scource: YouTube

Transcript of Baroness Bryony Worthington speaking at the CDKN Action Lab 4 April 2011 available on youtube

Don't Sell Your Coat: Surprising Truths About Climate Change

by Harold Ambler

Recent relevant Book: Publication Date: December 15, 2011

Not very long ago, scientists, politicians, and journalists were seemingly unanimous: Global warming had already damaged nature, and things were only going to get worse. Snow was rapidly becoming a thing of the past; summers were becoming hotter; storms were becoming more violent; droughts and floods were becoming more intense. This was a nightmare. In the end, though, none of it was true. And the whole idea of climate change was based on a lie: that weather and climate used to be nice. They weren’t. As for our own time, snow cover is increasing; summertime heating is negligible; hurricanes are diminishing; droughts and floods both used to be worse. The real nightmare is the politics suffusing modern climate science and the effects this is having on every resident of planet Earth. Don’t Sell Your Coat, besides bearing a suggestion for its readers, brings to the public the scientific argument that global cooling is as likely a scenario for the next few decades as any of the nightmares of Al Gore. It also allows non-scientists to enter the debate about climate change armed with facts and to have a sense of humor while they do so.

CO2 Regulation: The Essence of Immorality

Richard Lindzen: Climate alarmists turn morality on its head by coming down on the wrong side of truth.

Richard Lindzen : American atmospheric physicist and Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Lindzen is known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books.He was a lead author of Chapter 7, ‘Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,’ of the IPCC Third Assessment Report on climate change. He is a well known skeptic of global warming and critic of what he states are political pressures on climate scientists to conform to what he has called climate alarmism
Source: YouTube

The Maldives Are Not Sinking

says Nils-Axel Mörne

Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner is the head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden.
He is past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution, and leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. Dr. Mörner has been studying the sea level and its effects on coastal areas for some 35 years.

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

I have been the expert reviewer for the IPCC, both in 2000 and last year. The first time I read it, I was exceptionally surprised. First of all, it had 22 authors, but none of them—none—were sea-level specialists. They were given this mission, because they promised to answer the right thing.
Source: YouTube
Full interview in PDF

Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues

Remarks given by Mr. Rohrabacher of California on December 8, 2011 on the floor of the House, a matter of public record.
interesting part starts at 0:35min.

In President Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell speach he pointed to the danger “of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded.

"domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite."

Source: YouTube

Seeing is Believing

Isolated for 42 days in chambers of ambient and elevated CO2 concentrations, we periodically document the growth of cowpea plants (Vigna unguiculata) via time-lapse photography.
Source YouTube

Here are some links to respectable science websites all alerting: Other planets heat up as well

Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

Global Warming on Pluto Puzzles Scientists
by Robert Roy Britt
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_021009.html
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2002/pluto.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200607/s1697309.htm
http://www.dailytech.com/Global+Warming+on+Mars++and+Jupiter+Pluto+Neptune/article6544.htm

Global Warming on Mars -- and Jupiter, Pluto, Neptune
The entire solar system appears to be warming up lately. What's the root cause?
http://www.dailytech.com/Global+Warming+on+Mars++and+Jupiter+Pluto+Neptune/article6544.htm
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060504_red_jr.html

MIT researcher finds evidence of global warming on Neptune's largest moon
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/1998/triton.html

Uranus
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6657

Venus has suffered runaway warming and scientists hope the £140million mission will provide some lessons for the Earth.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16934133&method=full&siteid=66633&headline=warming-to-venus-mission--name_page.html

Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun’s activity is the common thread linking all these baking events.

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Interglacial Warmth

Does more of the former lead to more of the latter?
Source: YouTube

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs

A Petition signed by many scientists in the U.S.A. alone (i.e., not including international scientists) opposing the theory of "man-made global warming"

COP17 Global Day of Action

What the British media don't tell us...

Protesters sing I am a socialist at the Global Day of Action against climate change outside of the COP17 conference centre in Durban, South Africa, on December 3, 2011.

Many people at the demonstration clearly identified the pursuit of profit over environmental protection, and with it capitalism, as being a major factor for the stalled talks and the growing climate change crisis.
Source: YouTube

Presented to United Nations Climate Change Conference
in Durban, South Africa on December 7, 2011

Many of the proponents of man-made global warming are now claiming that climate change is worse than they predicted. According to an October 18, 2011 Daily Climate article, global warming activists claim that the “evidence builds that scientists underplay climate impacts” and “if anything, global climate disruption is likely to be significantly worse than has been suggested.”

But this exclusive Climate Depot exhaustive A-Z Climate Reality Check report on the scientific reality of the failure of man-made global warming shatters any such illusions that the climate is “worse than we thought.” As the real world evidence mounts that global warming claims are failing, the climate activists have ramped up predictions of future climate change impacts to declare that it “worse than we thought.”

But a prediction or projection of 50-100 years into the future is not “evidence.” Recent scientific data and developments reveal that Mother Nature is playing a cruel joke on the promoters of man-made climate fears. The scientific reality is that on virtually every claim -- from A-Z -- the claims of the promoters of man-made climate fears are failing, and in many instances the claims are moving in the opposite direction.

The global warming movement is suffering the scientific death of a thousand cuts. This Climate Depot special report categorizes and indexes the full range of climate developments in a handy A-Z reference guide. The A-Z report includes key facts, peer-reviewed studies and the latest data and developments with links for further reading, on an exhaustive range of man-made global warming claims.

Download the full document in PDF
or here.

2012: What's REALLY going to happen?

Source: YouTube

Al Gore's Lies Exposed By Congress

Al Gores LIES on how he think Global Warming is caused by a LIFE GIVING GAS called C02 are exposed by Rep. Steve Scalise
Source: YouTube

My very favorite quote from Mother Teresa was “If you invite me to an anti-war rally, I will not come. Invite me to a peace rally, and I will be there.” She did not waste her time on causes relating to division.

Eco-terrorism fantasy film 10:10No Pressure

A disturbing insight into the minds of the eco lunatics: "No Pressure" celebrates everybody who is actively tackling climate change... by blowing up those who aren't."
-Probably meant as satire, This is this close to the truth at present in the UK, emotionally.
Many people who found out the truth feel like they are treated like this by others, emotional blackmail.
Source: YouTube

Watermelons

In his book British "Watermelons: The Green Movement's True Colors" author James Delingpole tells the shocking story of how an unholy mix of junk science, green hype, corporate greed and political opportunism led to the biggest - and most expensive - outbreak of mass hysteria in history. Green on the outside, red on the inside.

In Watermelons, Delingpole explains the Climategate scandal, the cast of characters involved, their motives and methods. He delves into the background of the organizations and individuals who have sought to push global warming to the top of the political agenda, showing that beneath their cloak of green lurks a heart of red.

Watermelons shows how the scientific method has been sacrificed on the altar of climate alarmism. Delingpole mocks the green movement's pathetic record of apocalyptic predictions, from the "population bomb" to global cooling, which failed to materialize. He reveals the fundamental misanthropy of green ideology, "rooted in hatred of the human species, hell bent on destroying almost everything man has achieved".

What we are not being told about the climate - Full version

A concise study on Climate Change by the University of Calgary (24 min), a non-agressive comparison of the pro and cons.
Source: YouTube

Global Warming: How It All Began, the When Where and Why

Full story as a free PDF book

abstract: The origins of the global warming scare

The hypothesis of man-made global warming has existed since the 1880s. It was an obscure scientific hypothesis that burning fossil fuels would increase CO2 in the air to enhance the greenhouse effect and thus cause global warming. Before the 1980s this hypothesis was usually regarded as a curiosity because the nineteenth century calculations indicated that mean global temperature should have risen more than 1°C by 1940, and it had not. Then, in 1979, Mrs Margaret Thatcher (now Lady Thatcher) became Prime Minister of the UK, and she elevated the hypothesis to the status of a major international policy issue.

Mrs Thatcher is now often considered to have been a great UK politician: she gave her political party (the Conservative Party) victory in three General Elections, resided over the UK’s conduct of the Falklands War, replaced much of the UK’s Welfare State with monetarist economics, and privatized most of the UK’s nationalized industries. But she had yet to gain that reputation when she came to power in 1979. Then, she was the first female leader of a major western state, and she desired to be taken seriously by political leaders of other major countries. This desire seemed difficult to achieve because her only experience in government had been as Education Secretary (i.e. a Junior Minister) in the Heath administration that collapsed in 1974. She had achieved nothing notable as Education Secretary but was remembered by the UK public for having removed the distribution of milk to schoolchildren (she was popularly known as ‘Milk Snatcher Thatcher’.)

Sir Crispin Tickell, UK Ambassador to the UN, suggested a solution to the problem. He pointed out that almost all international statesmen are scientifically illiterate, so a scientifically literate politician could win any summit debate on a matter which seemed to depend on scientific understandings. And Mrs Thatcher had a BSc degree in chemistry. (This is probably the most important fact in the entire global warming issue; i.e. Mrs Thatcher had a BSc degree in chemistry). Sir Crispin pointed out that if a ‘scientific’ issue were to gain international significance, then the UK’s Prime Minister could easily take a prominent role, and this could provide credibility for her views on other world affairs. He suggested that Mrs Thatcher should campaign about global warming at each summit meeting. She did, and the tactic worked. Mrs Thatcher rapidly gained the desired international respect and the UK became the prime promoter of the global warming issue. The influences that enabled this are described in Figure 1 and the following paragraphs.

Overseas politicians began to take notice of Mrs Thatcher’s campaign if only to try to stop her disrupting summit meetings. They brought the matter to the attention of their civil servants for assessment, and they reported that - although scientifically dubious - ‘global warming’ could be economically important. The USA is the world’s most powerful economy and is the most intensive energy user. If all countries adopted ‘carbon taxes’, or other universal proportionate reductions in industrial activity, each non-US industrialized country would gain economic benefit over the United States. So, many politicians from many countries joined with Mrs Thatcher in expressing concern at global warming and a political bandwagon began to roll. Mrs Thatcher had raised an international policy issue and thus become an influential international politician.
Mrs Thatcher could not have promoted the global warming issue without the support of her UK political party. And they were willing to give it. Following the General Election of 1979, most of the incoming Cabinet had been members of the government which lost office in 1974. They blamed the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) for their 1974 defeat. They, therefore, desired an excuse for reducing the UK coal industry and, thus, the NUM’s power. Coal-fired power stations emit CO2 but nuclear power stations don’t. Global warming provided an excuse for reducing the UK’s dependence on coal by replacing it with nuclear power.
And the Conservative Party wanted a large UK nuclear power industry for another reason. That industry’s large nuclear processing facilities were required for the UK’s nuclear weapons program and the opposition Labour Party was then opposing the Conservative Party’s plans to upgrade the UK’s nuclear deterrent with Trident missiles and submarines. Unfortunately, the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents had damaged public confidence in nuclear technology. Then, privatization of the UK’s electricity supply industry exposed the secret that UK nuclear electricity cost four times

more than UK coal-fired electricity. Global warming became the only remaining excuse for the unpopular nuclear power facilities needed for nuclear weapons. Mrs Thatcher had to be seen to spend money at home if her international campaign was to be credible.
So, early in her global warming campaign - and at her personal instigation - the UK’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research was established, and the science and engineering research councils were encouraged to place priority in funding climate-related research. This cost nothing because the UK’s total research budget was not increased; indeed, it fell because of cuts elsewhere. But the Hadley Centre sustained its importance and is now the operating agency for the IPCC’s scientific working group (Working Group 1). Most scientists’ work depends on funds fully or partly provided by governments. Also, all scientists compete to obtain their share of this limited resource. Available research funds were shrinking, and global warming had become the ‘scientific’ issue of most interest to governments. Hence, any case for funding support tended to include reference to global warming whenever possible. Much science in many fields may be conducted under the guise of a relationship to global warming. Activities which have obtained funds by this method include biology, meteorology, computer science, physics, chemistry, climatology, oceanography, civil engineering, process engineering, forestry, astronomy, and several other disciplines. Now, funds for this work are provided to most UK Universities and several commercial research establishments.
Much peer pressure deters scientists from damaging potential sources of research funds. There is especial pressure - loss of future career - to avoid being the first to proclaim the scientific truth of global warming and thus damage the research funding of colleagues. But failure to proclaim the scientific truth does not mean that many scientists believe in the global warming hypothesis. In 1992 - at the height of the global warming scare - Greenpeace International conducted a survey of the world’s 400 leading climatologists. Greenpeace had hoped to publicize the results of that survey in the run-up to the Rio summit, but when they completed the survey, they gave very little publicity to its results. In response to the survey, only 15 climatologists were willing to say they believed in global warming, although all climatologists rely on it for their employment. Also, the Leipzig Declaration disputes the IPCC assertions about man-made global warming. It was drafted following the Leipzig Climate Conference in November 1995 and has been signed by over 1,500 scientists from around the world.
The global warming issue is political. It induced the ‘Earth Summit’ that was attended by several Heads of State in Rio de Janeiro during June 1992 and is the reason for the Kyoto Summit in Japan in December 1997. Governments have a variety of motives for interest in global warming. Each government has its own special interests in global warming but, in all cases, the motives relate to economic policies. In general, the USA fears loss of economic power to other nations while this is desired by those other nations. Universal adoption of ‘carbon taxes’, or other universal proportionate reductions in industrial activity, would provide relative benefit to the other nations. Unfortunately, if a few nations adopted the changes they would increase their manufacturing, transportation and energy costs and thus lose economic competitiveness and industrial activity to all other nations. Developing nations cannot afford technological and economic advances that would benefit them and also reduce their increases to CO2 emissions as they develop, so they are seeking gifted technology transfers and economic aid from developed countries.

The press are interested in selling papers and the TV companies want to gain viewers. Threat of world-wide disaster makes a good story, and the statements and actions of politicians together with great increase in scientific publications gave global warming an apparent authority. The media began to proclaim the worst imagined horrors. For example, massive floods were predicted due to melting of polar ice. and one UK TV program went so far as to assert that the polar bears would die out because their habitat would melt. The public rely on the media to provide them with their information, so they came to believe the global warming scare because they were only given one side of the story. Politicians respond to public concern, so the politicians actions began to gain popular support.
On face value global warming is an environmental issue. Many environmentalists joined the bandwagon. Governments were offering money and the public were concerned at global warming. Any environmental issue which could be linked to global warming was said to be involved in the matter. But the environmentalist interest was aroused by the impact of the issue. Contrary to common belief, environmentalists did not raise awareness of global warming, they responded to it. Simply, environmentalist organizations were part of the general public and decided to use the issue when it became useful to them.

The UK Government lost interest in global warming when Mr John Major replaced Mrs Thatcher as Prime Minister. The flow of Government money began to stop for conduct of global warming research. UK scientists then began to speak out in denial of the global warming hypothesis. It seemed that the issue was dying a natural death. Then the ‘coal crisis’ arose in October 1992 when the public protested at the scale of pit closures. This gave the UK Government a new need to find an excuse for its policy of closing coal mines. Global warming fitted this need and so the Government committed £16,000,000 to an advertising campaign which scare mongered about global warming, and re-established the funding priorities for climate research.
Later, at the start of May 1997, the Conservative Party lost office to the Labour Party and Mr Tony Blair became UK Prime Minister. The UK had initiated the global warming issue and a change of UK policy may have had a significant effect on the widespread imagined risk, but by then the global warming issue had become important in its own right. Many countries had a stated global warming policy, 122 of them had signed a declaration of intent to reduce CO2 emissions at the Rio Summit, and the Kyoto Summit was scheduled. The UK was one of the very few countries that had reduced its CO2 emissions since the Rio Summit because the UK had replaced coal-fired generating capacity by gas-fired generating capacity. This provided the UK with a position of authority in this international affair, and Mr Blair committed the new UK government to strict action to cut CO2 emissions.

end of abstract