Over 1,600 International Scientists Sign ‘No Climate Emergency’ Declaration; Dismissed The Existence of a Climate Crisis

As you, our avid readers of this blog site know, we’ve been reporting on climate change and how technology startups around the world are doing their fair share to address one of the most significant challenges of our time.

For more than a decade, we’ve published hundreds of articles to raise awareness of climate change issues to millions of audiences. However, a new declaration from more than one thousand international scientists suggests that we may have been wrong about the severity of the problem. The scientists even went as far as dismissing the existence of a climate crisis.

Contrary to the popular alarmist narrative, a group of international scientists, including two Nobel laureates, has jointly signed a declaration dismissing the existence of a climate crisis and insisting that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth, contrary to the popular alarmist narrative.

In a report published on August 14, a group of over 1,600 international scientists signed a declaration that contradicts the popular alarmist narrative about climate change, dismissing the existence of a climate crisis and insisting that carbon dioxide is beneficial to Earth. Among the CLINTEL signatories are two Nobel laureates in physics: John Francis Clauser from the United States and Ivan Giaever, a Norwegian-American.

The group, which goes by the name Global Climate Intelligence Group (CLINTEL), said in its World Climate Declaration document that:

“There is no climate emergency. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”

The declaration was signed by a total of 1,609 scientists and professionals from around the world, including 321 from the United States.

“Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures,” CLINTEL said.

The coalition pointed out that “the geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.”

Warming is far slower than predicted

In a section titled “Warming is far slower than predicted,” the group said that the world has warmed significantly less than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.”

“Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools,” the coalition said, adding that these models “exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases” and “ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.” For instance, even though climate alarmists characterize CO2 as environmentally-damaging, the coalition pointed out that the gas is “not a pollutant.”

Carbon dioxide is “essential” to all life on earth and is “favorable” for nature. Extra CO2 results in the growth of global plant biomass while also boosting the yields of crops worldwide.

CLINTEL didn’t stop there. The coalition also dismissed the narrative of global warming being linked to increased natural disasters like hurricanes, floods, and droughts, stressing that there is “no statistical evidence” to support these claims.

“There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are,” it said.

“To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. Should not we free ourselves from the naive belief in immature climate models?”

The group also explained that “CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. More CO2 is favorable for nature, greening our planet. Additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also profitable for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.”

Global warming has not increased natural disasters

In another section, the group asserted that “there is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts, and such natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.” The group also warned the government and policymakers:

“Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities. There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. Go for adaptation instead of mitigation; adaptation works whatever the causes are.”

So what do you think? Chime in and share your thoughts.

You can read the entire report below.