David Kear, former Director-General of NZ Scientific Research, says global warming is a non-existent threat

Climate Depot reports on a New Zealand geoscientist who has worked at the highest levels and has just released a detailed statement about why the threat of rising sea-levels has been blown out of all proportions, and “An ‘innocent gas, CO2, has been demonized and criminalized’”.

“The widespread obsession with Global-Warming-Climate-Change, in opposition to all factual evidence, is quite incredible.”

Kear laments the ‘Astronomical Cost of Major Measures to Combat a Non-Existent Threat’.

His scientific caliber: “Dr David Kear has a background in geology and engineering, becoming the Director General of the DSIR (Department of Scientific and Industrial Research) in 1980. He is a Fellow and Past Vice-President of the Royal Society of New Zealand, and Past President of the New Zealand Geological Society [which promises to catalogue his work here]. Dr Kear has over 100 publications on New Zealand and Pacific geology, vulcanology and mineral resources.” Apparently a foraminifera shell was named after him in 1962.

He has been in this for a very long time.

h/t to Ian for the link to Steven Goddard.



Six Grave Scientific Errors and the history of an absurd idea

Kear talks about the grave scientific errors he has witnessed, and gives a history of how an absurd idea took hold. I found it very interesting. What I find myself wondering as I read this, is whether he had made any public skeptical statements before, and if not, why not.

My interest in our changing climate and sea level

During fieldwork for a PhD thesisc I found a coastal exposure of soft sandstone at

Ohuka Creek, south of Port Waikato. There were Pliocene fossils of marine shellfish

below an extensive horizontal bedding plane. Above that plane were more fossils, but

of cool-lovinga plants. A finger could show the exact location of the abrupt change to

the cooler climate at the onset of the first of the world-wide Pleistocene glaciations

[Ice Ages]. Ice formed widely at the ultimate expense of sea water, so sea level fell.

At Ohuka, sea bed had become land. Such changes are rarely seen in a continuous

sequence, so I recorded it in a 1957 scientific paperb. That resulted in my joining an

informal world-wide Group researching changing sea levels.

Most interest then was about the rate of sea level rise as the Earth warmed following

the “Little Ice Age”. That cool period, from about 1500 to 1700 AD, halted winemaking

in England and taro cropping in New Zealand. Our Group determined the

rate of sea level rise in many different World regions, from widely-available readings

of tide gauges (less variable than those of thermometers). The average for us all was

125 mm/century (“125” here). Hence it would take 8 centuries for sea level to rise

1m – no serious threat to us.

Global Warming Dawns Subsequently, I attended many international science

conferences representing DSIR, NZ or Pacific Nations. I noted the words “Global

Warming” appearing increasingly in paper titles, and sensed a growing number of

adherents. Those latter arranged a first-ever “Conference on Global Warming” in

Vienna in 1985. Unlike most such meetings, where a communiqué summarising

achievements was released on the final day, the full results of this one were delayed

for over 2 years.

When they did appear (front page, NZ Herald, two days before Christmas 1987) a

World Declaration included “Overseas scientists have estimated that the seas around

New Zealand will rise by up to 1.4 m in the next 40 years”. That article concentrated

on the massive consequent problems, caused by our carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions,

but gave no adequate supporting science. That rate of rise was equivalent to 3,500

mm/century, 28 times faster than our 125. Hence we stupidly ignored it, thinking noone

could possibly believe it. But the World did believe, and the Global Warming

mirage was born. Had 3,500 been true, sea level should have risen by almost 1 m by

today – it hasn’t, not even closely.

This showed unambiguously that those “Overseas Scientists” were not true scientists.

They ignored a most important basic rule of true science “Thou shall not publish

Science without first checking it. A check against local tide gauges would have

shown how wrong 1.4 m in 40 yrs was; they simply hadn’t bothered to check. That

was a First Grave Error.

Australian government scientists were concerned about the effects on Pacific Island

nations by any sea level rise of around 3,500 mm/century, and launched a project to

determine the correct figure at that time. They announced the result at the 1992

meeting of SOPAC – a geoscientific organisation of South Pacific nations. Their

figure was 122 mm/century, confirming the order of magnitude of our group’s 125

average value.

Fooling the World The Global Warmers persisted with their use of pseudo-science

and made further predictions. Understandably they too all proved wrong. At

conferences I began to hear, regardless of the science involved, when a speaker

wished to “rubbish” some scientific idea or research, he/she stated that conclusion

firmly, and followed it by “Just like Global Warming”. Clearly the Global Warmers

heard that too. They didn’t change their pseudo-science, but cleverly changed the

name to ‘Climate Change”. [One can disprove warming, but the words change of

climate can’t be proved wrong].

The United Nations became interested – major sea level rise could cause havoc in

low-lying areas or island groups. They established an Intergovernmental Panel for

Climate Change (IPCC) and invited nations to send delegates. Not surprisingly those

chosen were almost entirely Global Warmers, because they clearly knew something

about it. But to do them credit the Panel members acted a little more like true

scientists than those earlier.

They accepted that “1.4 m in 40 yrs” was wrong and re-evaluated it as “0.49 m by

2100”, [roundly a century ahead]. Thus they dropped 3,500 down to 500 mm/century

– to 14% of the original. The cause remained unchanged – our CO2 emissions to the

atmosphere. In no other human activity would those involved retain a belief when the

most crucial item involved was found to be 86% wrong by themselves. That was a

Second Grave Error.

The New Errors The new value of “0.49 m by 2100” became widely accepted. In

New Zealand, District Councils were instructed by Government Departments, like

Conservation and Environment, and by Regional Councils, that they must take full

account of the risk that “0.49” implied for a sea level rise by 2100. Councils had to

consider that in the same way as earthquake and volcanic risk. Yet that “0.49” value

doesn’t stand up to the most simple scientific scrutiny.

First, the rate is four times faster than the current sea level rise, as indicated by

regional, widely-available tide gauges; second, no reason was given for quadrupling

the value, and third, good science interprets “0.49” in this sense as being deliberately

different from 0.48 and 0.50. Thus that effectively claims that those who determined

that value know, for sure, where sea level will be a century ahead to ±5 mm. That

was, and is, patently absurd.

These were the Third, Fourth & Fifth Grave Errors.

Further Damning Disclosures The United Nations appointed me personally to their

UNCSTD Committee which assists small countries with their ability regarding

Science and Technology Development. Three or so of us would go to a central city to

talk and discuss their options with delegates from regional countries. On one

occasion we met in Prague, to assist countries on both sides of the “Iron Curtain”.

While there, we were invited to visit the World’s only “Institute for Global

Warming”. It was founded and funded incredibly by the USA and Soviet Union

jointly, at the height of their “Cold War”, in an attempt to fund something “for the

good of Mankind”, rather than “for armaments”. Some of its staff could have

attended the 1985 Conference, and helped create the 1987 World Declaration.

I took the opportunity of asking to see copies of the documents that had been brought

to that 1985 Meeting in neutral Austria. Several attendees brought their estimates for

sea level rise due to Global Warming. The values, converted to mm/century, ranged

from 500 minimum to 3,500 maximum. There can be no doubt that, to ensure that

their 1987 World Declaration made the greatest impact, they published the maximum

value – contravening the most sacred rule of acceptable science Thou shall not publish

items for monetary, political, or personal gain that are not clear un-biased un-inflated

truths.

The fact that “up to” was used, might be allowed in non-scientific areas, but not in

Science. If World Media had distorted the message, the Warmers should immediately

have denied what was wrongly claimed, and ensured that the proper statement got

equal publicity. Using a maximum value for greatest effect was the Sixth (and

Worst) Grave Error.

* * *

Astronomical Cost of Major Measures to Combat a Non-Existent Threat:

Politicians and the Media have listened to the proponents of Global-Warming-

Climate-Change, but don’t seem to have made any critical assessment of it all.

Perhaps they were bemused by the Global Warmers constantly naming themselves

and associates as “Scientists”. As has been shown, those people disregarded the basic

rules of true Science. Their political and media audiences innocently believed the

statements – which contained grave errors.

Innocents in politics and the media were badly mis-led. They gladly supported

projects to combat the non-existent threat of Global-Warming-Climate-Change. The

projects were unnecessary because there was no threat; extremely costly in money

time and effort; full of praise where ridicule was deserved misleading about benefits

& options; and above all diversionary away from today’s real problems.

A huge international bureaucratic industry was born – with Cabinet Ministers,

government departments, company sections, travel, conferences, treaties, carbon

credits, and carbon trading, and very much more. The challenge was often heard that

we must curb our carbon emissions or sacrifice our grandchildren’s well-being. In

truth, those children were being saddled with a gigantic debt to pay for everything

encompassed by the Warmers’ “carbon footprints”, including the salaries and

expenses of the loudest proponents.

The widespread obsession with Global-Warming-Climate-Change, in opposition to all

factual evidence, is quite incredible. It leads to unfair treatment of some citizens, and

a massive bill for all, for nothing useful. When will citizens revolt effectively against

such callous disregard for their observations and wishes, by those who are essentially

their elected employees? When will the perpetrators examine the basis of their

ideology, and realise that it’s based on unfounded unscientific beliefs, not on

confirmed, widely-available investigations by real scientists who abide by the moral

standards of their profession?

Click here to read the rest of the 7 page PDF.

I’m interested in hearing any other skeptical statements Dr David Kear may have made, and in hearing from any NZ skeptics who may have met him, or heard him speak.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

please wait... Rating: 9.0/10 (166 votes cast)