Cambridge university council member abusive, “go and die in a ditch”

The original email was sent to 440 UK Academic Society and University Leadership recipients, including Jason Scott-Warren: Click here.

Email was titled: Prevent Genocide: You are requested to investigate the IPCC’s politicized corruption of normal-science, and its impact on UK academia, the MetOffice, and future human safety.

 

Cambridge University Council Member tells me to ‘go and die in a ditch” for the above email
From: Jason Scott-Warren <jes1003@cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Prevent Genocide: You are requested to investigate the IPCC’s politicized corruption of normal-science, and its impact on UK academia, the MetOffice, and future human safety
Date: October 1, 2019 at 10:51:04 PM GMT+13
ie you have absolutely no credentials in this area. Please remove me from your email list and go and die in a ditch. 
Cambridge University Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, and pro-Vice Chancellors requested to investigate abuse

Dear Cambridge University Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, and pro-Vice Chancellors

I received an abusive email from one of your university council members last week, resulting from my request for Cambridge University’s leadership (and UK Academia) to investigate the IPCC’s corruption of normal-science (see email below).

Extracted from Dr. Jason Scott-Warren’s email: “ie you have absolutely no credentials in this area. Please remove me from your email list and go and die in a ditch.” (See attached email)

Whether I have credentials is irrelevant to the principles of normal-science. The only climate science and key-risk assessment that matters is what the IPCC promotes to our governments in academia’s borrowed name. So unless you have critically reviewed all 5,000 pages of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report against the climate literature and data, please tell me who holds the right to judge credentials?

What credentials do you have if you failed to subtract earlier global climate index versions from the current versions to see global warming’s major fabrication by UK/USA government agencies; or you failed to realize this warming phase started long before significant human activity (early 1700s); or you ignored Thomas Kuhn and failed to refute the IPCC’s radiative-forcing theory based on its three-decade legacy of generating highly inaccurate global surface temperature forecasts; or you failed to heed Karl Popper and falsify the IPCC’s key-risk related theory that changed the ice age boundaries (start and end) when it was clearly in error, just to eliminate any contestation to its four Representative Concentration Pathway global warming predictions?

Furthermore, what does it say about academia’s credentials if it allowed UNFCCC Article 2 to dictate theoretical key-risks (linked to theoretical AGW), while it accepted the IPCC’s dismissal of catastrophic natural climate change risks, and which are in plentiful evidence since the Holocene Climate Optimum? With only five decades of proven oil and gas reserves, and peak discovery a fact of history, how will we produce the emissions required to prevent a natural cooling or catastrophic natural climate change risks for 1,000 to 30,000 years as promised? Under WHO’s obsolete global vaccine strategy for pandemic influenza we are left unnecessarily vulnerable during this high-risk grand solar minimum period, despite the lessons of 2009’s swine flu vaccine supply debacle (my credentials, see below). The WHO and UK government (and others) and UK academia linked to zoonosis/pandemic threats were notified in Q1-2018 numerous times (ignored), which led to the UK Cabinet Office checking me out on LinkedIn (again).

As a strategist looking from the outside, it could be argued that UN Agenda-21 has future population control by natural climate change catastrophe operating in stealth mode (thanks to bad IPCC/WHO strategies), which was partially enabled by academia turning a blind eye on normal-science as it whored for government funding. In the event of an unmitigated-dismissed natural climate change catastrophe (pandemic influenza included) academia’s credentials will be irreparably tarnished by its complicity in strategic genocide.

Will you please investigate the unprofessional conduct of your council member in the course of doing university business, and this corruption of normal science that jeopardizes global human safety?

Thank you.

Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University) MBA (The London Business School)

 

Advocate for Natural Climate Change Risk-Mitigation: Switching to Renewable Energy, and Implementing Decentralized/Centralized Sustainable Development and Prepandemic Influenza Immunization (Urgently)
FreeBook “Revolution: Ice age Re-entry”: Amazon (https://amzn.to/2PyQsxV), Google Play (http://bit.ly/2JFHz08), Kobo (http://bit.ly/2F3DdRQ), and Researchgate PDF (http://bit.ly/2UnTBju
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlton-brown-13b66232/ 
Website: http://grandsolarminimum.com 
Twitter (for an activist discussion): https://twitter.com/Iceagereentry
Copyright © 2014 Carlton B. Brown of http://grandsolarminimum.com. All Rights are Reserved. You are free to forward this information on to third parties and use this information under CC-BY-SA 4.0 rules. 

UK Cabinet Office requested to investigate the corruption of normal science

Dear Prime Minister and Cabinet Office

You are requested to investigate the systematic corruption of normal-science by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and its impact on UK Academia (climate science and dependent disciplines) and the advise the IPCC provides to the UK government. The IPCC’s climate- and risk-science are promoted as representing a consensus of the international scientific community, which UK Crown and Academic scientists and the UK Met Office Hadley Centre has contributed to. This same request was sent to hundreds of science leaders at the UK Science and Social Science Academies, and UK Universities.

This UNFCCC Article 1 and 2-led corruption resulted in the dismissal or omission of catastrophic natural climate change risks relevant to the 21st century (Fifth Assessment Report, AR5). This corruption also eliminated our correct glacial cycle bearing on today’s climate, and permitted society’s manipulation with biased weather reports that hide the natural climate change truth. In the event of a natural climate change catastrophe, this corruption could constitute an act of genocide.

Please find attached a fully cited scientific refutation of the IPCC’s key-risk assessment (see below). For clarity, UNFCCC Article 1’s definition of climate change is fundamentally different to natural climate change, as are the key-risks.

The following summarizes the IPCC’s incriminating disclosures that undermine the validity of its AR5 climate change key-risk assessment. The IPCC;

  1. Projected a 2016-2035 global temperature increase of 0.3°C-0.7°C. Between early 2016 and mid-2019 the global temperature declined 0.47°C while CO2 increased 2.8% (average of 4 global climate indices).
  2. Disclosed its highly inaccurate climate forecasts: 1986-1998; 84% under-forecasted the global mean surface temperature (GMST). 1998-2012; 97% over-forecasted GMST while 100% failed to predict the 15-year climate hiatus during this period, when CO2 increased 8.0%. Carbon dioxide’s rise is known by science to have lagged behind the temperature rise by 9-12 months during this same three decade period.
  3. Failed to inform governments that this warming phase started in the early 1700s, long before significant human greenhouse gas emissions. This indicates something else ‘controlled’ this three century warming phase, and therefore a UNFCCC Article 2 diktat does not control the key-risks (see point 7).
  4. Disclosed its use of global climate indices, that have been sequentially altered by UK/US government agenciessince 1990. These index alterations accentuated the recent global warming, making government agencies the biggest contributor to ‘anthropogenic’ global warming (MetOffice, NOAA, NASA).
  5. Omitted to explain the significant glaciation that was initiatedat both Poles after the Holocene Climate Optimum, from about five millennia ago, which tracked a 40-50Watt/m^2 decline in solar irradiance (@65°N) and a 5°C decline in polar ice core temperatures by 1700CE (i.e., 20% of the Arctic’s absolute interglacial temperature rise). This glaciation peaked during the Little Ice Age, and its early-19th century melt initiation preceded significant human activity. Despite these (de)glaciation facts, the IPCC dismissed with virtual certainty the prospect of glaciation for the next 1,000 years.
  6. Erroneously delayed the next ice by an unprecedented 30,000-50,000 years, while stating the last ice age ended ‘about 10,000 years ago’ (both falsifiable). These critical risk-linked assumptions failed to reflect the existing climate data and were not subject to peer review scrutiny, and the ice age delay is statistically falsifiable on three counts.
  7. Only assessed key-risks relative to UNFCCC Article 2(i.e., theoretical anthropogenic global warming), while it biasedly dismissed or omitted catastrophic natural climate change risks most relevant to the 21st century i.e., global cooling, glaciation, climate-forcing volcanism, rapid climate change, and pandemic influenza.
  8. Erroneously dismissed key scientific lessons associated with the Little Ice Age and the rapid climate change eventssince just before the Holocene Climate Optimum (see point 7’s risks), linked to climate change, and its associated famine, war, and epidemic related catastrophes, civilization destructions and species extinctions.
  9. Omitted to disclose that leading solar activity scientists expert in climate change have warned of a return to a Little Ice Age-like climate during this current grand solar minimum period.
  10. Confirmed that we only have decades of ‘proven’ oil and gas reserves left. Fifty-plus years of proven oil and gas reservesare insufficient to generate the full 21st century global warming that we are fear-mongered with, let alone delay an ice age. With reserves-to-production for oil and gas being less than 100% for most of the last 40 years, peak discovery is history.

If normal science were operating in the climate science field, the IPCC’s radiative forcing theory, forecasts and its key-risk assessment would be falsified.

Earth’s ice age entry after the Holocene Climate Optimum millennia ago, our ‘probable’ 21st century ice age re-entry (P-value <0.05), and a host of catastrophic natural climate change related risks linked to grand solar minimum periods are clearly evident by analyzing the full repertoire of climate, solar activity, volcanic eruption, and pandemic influenza outbreak data (see attached).

While I am sure UK academia is loathe to speak up against this politicized corruption of ‘normal-science’ as it holds its hand out for funding, I am here to remind government and academia – before its too late – that in the event of a natural climate change catastrophe (pandemic influenza included), parts of academia could be complicit in crimes against humanity. This email was prompted by members of your Cabinet Office reviewing my LinkedIn profile last week after my request to New Zealand’s Royal Society Te Apārangi Council and University Leadership to investigate this Article 1 and 2-led corruption.

What are you going to do about re-asserting scientific integrity over this politicized corruption of normal science, and ensuring the future safety of UK citizens and the post-Brexit UK economy?

Please see below my signature for a summary of my career skills relevant to earth system risks.

Attachments: if not attached to this email please click the following links.

  1. Scientific Refutation: Scientific Refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1&2 dictated Key Risk Assessment_UK V2
  2. Slide deck: Scientific Refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1&2 dictated Key Risk Assessment
  3. Hyperlink to this email: Click here.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University) MBA (London Business School)

Advocate for Natural Climate Change Risk-Mitigation: Switching to Renewable Energy, and Implementing Decentralized/Centralized Sustainable Development and Prepandemic Influenza Immunization (Urgently)
FreeBook “Revolution: Ice age Re-entry”: Amazon (https://amzn.to/2PyQsxV), Google Play (http://bit.ly/2JFHz08), Kobo (http://bit.ly/2F3DdRQ), and Researchgate (http://bit.ly/2UnTBju)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlton-brown-13b66232/
Website: http://grandsolarminimum.com
Twitter (for an activist discussion): https://twitter.com/Iceagereentry

Copyright © 2014 Carlton B. Brown of http://grandsolarminimum.com. All Rights are Reserved. You are free to forward this information on to third parties and use this information under CC-BY-SA 4.0 rules.

 

My professional background and research link to earth system risks: See my LinkedIn profile.

I am a New Zealand qualified veterinarian (Massey University, 1986), with an MBA (London Business School, 1997) and a commercial background in human life sciences (Pharma, Biotech, Investment Banking, UK). I spent a decade innovating and developing a universal pandemic influenza vaccine able to immunologically target all potential pandemic influenza-A strains in humans. As founding-innovating CEO I raised £23million from corporate/blue-chip life-science investors for that UK venture before my company was sold in 2015.

That vaccine innovation project catalyzed my interest in influenza viral mutation epidemiology, and the role of Arctic migrating birds carrying pre-pandemic viruses into cyclical extremes of electromagnetism, geomagnetism, and natural climate change. This resulted in the discovery that pandemic influenza outbreaks since 1500CE (the Little Ice Age) biased 11-year solar minimum/maximum periods, and grand solar minimum periods linked to Arctic cooling and glaciation. This bio-system discovery was facilitated by analyzing the permutations of correlations between solar activity, geomagnetism, climate change, volcanism, and influenza pandemics, which made the lie about anthropogenic global warming obvious.

As a veterinarian, I have spent my career developing an expertise in using thermometers and recording temperatures, understanding the complexities of biological system control and regulation, and managing health and risks. These skills were directly applicable to understanding Earth as a complex cyclical system sustaining life. My science background and investment banking/analytical skills made it easy to comprehend this UNFCCC Article 1 and 2 enabled sham-science, and how climate science is in error as to our glacial cycle stage.

 

 

 

UK academia requested to investigate the corruption of normal science

Email sent to 440 UK Academic Society and University Leadership recipients: Click here.

Dear Royal Society, British Academy, Academy of Social Science, and UK University Leadership Teams

You are requested to investigate the systematic corruption of normal-science by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and its impact on UK Academia (climate science and dependent disciplines) and the advise the IPCC provides to the UK government. The IPCC’s climate- and risk-science are promoted as representing a consensus of the international scientific community, which UK Academic scientists and the UK Met Office Hadley Centre has contributed to. The UK Cabinet Office among other stakeholders knows this request has been made.

This UNFCCC Article 1 and 2-led corruption resulted in the dismissal or omission of catastrophic natural climate change risks relevant to the 21st century (Fifth Assessment Report, AR5). This corruption also eliminated our correct glacial cycle bearing on today’s climate, and permitted society’s manipulation with biased weather reports that hide the natural climate change truth. In the event of a natural climate change catastrophe, this corruption could constitute an act of genocide.

Please find attached a fully cited scientific refutation of the IPCC’s key-risk assessment (see below). For clarity, UNFCCC Article 1’s definition of climate change is fundamentally different to natural climate change, as are the key-risks.

The following summarizes the IPCC’s incriminating disclosures that undermine the validity of its AR5 climate change key-risk assessment. The IPCC;

  1. Projected a 2016-2035 global temperature increase of 0.3°C-0.7°C. Between early 2016 and mid-2019 the global temperature declined 0.47°C while CO2 increased 2.8% (average of 4 global climate indices).
  2. Disclosed its highly inaccurate climate forecasts: 1986-1998; 84% under-forecasted the global mean surface temperature (GMST). 1998-2012; 97% over-forecasted GMST while 100% failed to predict the 15-year climate hiatus during this period, when CO2 increased 8.0%. Carbon dioxide’s rise is known by science to have lagged behind the temperature rise by 9-12 months during this same three decade period.
  3. Failed to inform governments that this warming phase started in the early 1700s, long before significant human greenhouse gas emissions. This indicates something else ‘controlled’ this three century warming phase, and therefore a UNFCCC Article 2 diktat does not control the key-risks (see point 7).
  4. Disclosed its use of global climate indices, that have been sequentially altered by UK/US government agencies since 1990. These index alterations accentuated the recent global warming, making government agencies the biggest contributor to ‘anthropogenic’ global warming (MetOffice, NOAA, NASA).
  5. Omitted to explain the significant glaciation that was initiated at both Poles after the Holocene Climate Optimum, from about five millennia ago, which tracked a 40-50Watt/m^2 decline in solar irradiance (@65°N) and a 5°C decline in polar ice core temperatures by 1700CE (i.e., 20% of the Arctic’s absolute interglacial temperature rise). This glaciation peaked during the Little Ice Age, and its early-19th century melt initiation preceded significant human activity. Despite these (de)glaciation facts, the IPCC dismissed with virtual certainty the prospect of glaciation for the next 1,000 years.
  6. Erroneously delayed the next ice by an unprecedented 30,000-50,000 years, while stating the last ice age ended ‘about 10,000 years ago’ (both falsifiable). These critical risk-linked assumptions failed to reflect the existing climate data and were not subject to peer review scrutiny, and the ice age delay is statistically falsifiable on three counts.
  7. Only assessed key-risks relative to UNFCCC Article 2 (i.e., theoretical anthropogenic global warming), while it biasedly dismissed or omitted catastrophic natural climate change risks most relevant to the 21st century i.e., global cooling, glaciation, climate-forcing volcanism, rapid climate change, and pandemic influenza.
  8. Erroneously dismissed key scientific lessons associated with the Little Ice Age and the rapid climate change events since just before the Holocene Climate Optimum (see point 7’s risks), linked to climate change, and its associated famine, war, and epidemic related catastrophes, civilization destructions and species extinctions.
  9. Omitted to disclose that leading solar activity scientists expert in climate change have warned of a return to a Little Ice Age-like climate during this current grand solar minimum period.
  10. Confirmed that we only have decades of ‘proven’ oil and gas reserves left. Fifty-plus years of proven oil and gas reserves are insufficient to generate the full 21st century global warming that we are fear-mongered with, let alone delay an ice age. With reserves-to-production for oil and gas being less than 100% for most of the last 40 years, peak discovery is history.

If normal science were operating in the climate science field, the IPCC’s radiative forcing theory, forecasts and its key-risk assessment would be falsified.

Earth’s ice age entry after the Holocene Climate Optimum millennia ago, our ‘probable’ 21st century ice age re-entry (P-value <0.05), and a host of catastrophic natural climate change related risks linked to grand solar minimum periods are clearly evident by analyzing the full repertoire of climate, solar activity, volcanic eruption, and pandemic influenza outbreak data (see attached).

While I am sure UK academia is loathe to speak up against this politicized corruption of ‘normal-science’, as it holds its hand out for government funding, I am here to remind the UK science and social science governing bodies and university leadership – before its too late – that in the event of a natural climate change catastrophe (pandemic influenza included), parts of UK academia could be complicit in crimes against humanity.

What are you going to do about re-asserting scientific integrity over this politicized corruption of normal science, and ensuring the future safety of UK citizens and the post-Brexit UK economy?

Please see below my signature for a summary of my career skills relevant to earth system risks.

Attachments: if not attached to this email please click the following links.

  1. Scientific Refutation: Scientific Refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1&2 dictated Key Risk Assessment_UK V2
  2. Slide deck: Scientific Refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1&2 dictated Key Risk Assessment
  3. Hyperlink to this email: Click here.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University) MBA (London Business School)

Advocate for Natural Climate Change Risk-Mitigation: Switching to Renewable Energy, and Implementing Decentralized/Centralized Sustainable Development and Prepandemic Influenza Immunization (Urgently)
FreeBook “Revolution: Ice age Re-entry”: Amazon (https://amzn.to/2PyQsxV), Google Play (http://bit.ly/2JFHz08), Kobo (http://bit.ly/2F3DdRQ), and Researchgate (http://bit.ly/2UnTBju)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlton-brown-13b66232/
Website: http://grandsolarminimum.com
Twitter (for an activist discussion): https://twitter.com/Iceagereentry

Copyright © 2014 Carlton B. Brown of http://grandsolarminimum.com. All Rights are Reserved. You are free to forward this information on to third parties and use this information under CC-BY-SA 4.0 rules.

 

My professional background and research link to earth system risks: See my LinkedIn profile.

I am a New Zealand qualified veterinarian (Massey University, 1986), with an MBA (London Business School, 1997) and a commercial background in human life sciences (Pharma, Biotech, Investment Banking, UK). I spent a decade innovating and developing a universal pandemic influenza vaccine able to immunologically target all potential pandemic influenza-A strains in humans. As founding-innovating CEO I raised £23 million from corporate/blue-chip life-science investors for that UK venture before my company was sold in 2015.

That vaccine innovation project catalyzed my interest in influenza viral mutation epidemiology, and the role of Arctic migrating birds carrying pre-pandemic viruses into cyclical extremes of electromagnetism, geomagnetism, and natural climate change. This resulted in the discovery that pandemic influenza outbreaks since 1500CE (the Little Ice Age) biased 11-year solar minimum/maximum periods, and grand solar minimum periods linked to Arctic cooling and glaciation. This bio-system discovery was facilitated by analyzing the permutations of correlations between solar activity, geomagnetism, climate change, volcanism, and influenza pandemics, which made the lie about anthropogenic global warming obvious.

As a veterinarian, I have spent my career developing an expertise in using thermometers and recording temperatures, understanding the complexities of biological system control and regulation, and managing health and risks. These skills were directly applicable to understanding Earth as a complex cyclical system sustaining life. My science background and investment banking/analytical skills made it easy to comprehend this UNFCCC Article 1 and 2 enabled sham-science, and how climate science is in error as to our glacial cycle stage.

Royal Society Council requested to investigate the corruption of climate science

Email recipients (1193): Royal Society Te Apārangi Council, and New Zealand University Leadership Recipients 

Link to a scientific refutation of the IPCC’s climate change key-risk assessment (5th Assessment Report) Scientific Refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1&2 dictated Key Risk Assessment_Royal Society Te Apārangi Council

 

Dear Royal Society Te Apārangi Council, and New Zealand University Leadership, Councils and Committees (and the BCC-ed)

You are requested to investigate the systematic corruption of normal-science by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and its impact on New Zealand academic climate and associated sciences. The IPCC’s climate- and risk-science is promoted as representing a consensus of the international scientific community, which New Zealand crown and academic scientists have contributed to.

This UNFCCC Article 1 and 2-led corruption resulted in the dismissal or omission of catastrophic natural climate change risks relevant to the 21st century (Fifth Assessment Report, AR5). This corruption also eliminated our correct glacial cycle bearing on today’s climate, and permitted society’s manipulation with biased weather reports that hide the natural climate change truth. In the event of a natural climate change catastrophe this corruption could constitute an act of genocide.

Please find attached a fully cited scientific refutation of the IPCC’s key-risk assessment. For clarity, UNFCCC Article 1’s definition of climate change is fundamentally different to natural climate change, as are the key-risks.

Given Minister James Shaw’s policy defining beliefs in AR5, conveyed to me by email, he was asked in reply how he could reconcile his beliefs with the following incriminating AR5 disclosures. The IPCC (summary);

  1. Projected a 2016-2035 global temperature increase of 0.3°C-0.7°C. Between early 2016 and mid-2019 the global temperature declined 0.47°C while CO2 increased 2.8% (average of 4 global climate indices).
  2. Disclosed its highly inaccurate climate forecasts: 1986-1998; 84% under-forecasted the global mean surface temperature (GMST). 1998-2012; 97% over-forecasted GMST while 100% failed to predict the 15-year climate hiatus during this period, when CO2 increased 8.0%. Carbon dioxide’s rise is known by science to have lagged behind the temperature rise by 9-12 months during this same three decade period.
  3. Failed to inform governments that this warming phase started in the early 1700s, long before significant human greenhouse gas emissions. This indicates something else ‘controlled’ this centennial-scale warming, and therefore a UNFCCC Article 2 diktat does not control the key-risks.
  4. Disclosed its use of global climate indices, that have been sequentially altered by US/UK government agencies since 1990. These index fabrications accentuated the recent global warming, making government agencies the biggest contributor to ‘anthropogenic’ global warming.
  5. Omitted to explain the significant glaciation that was initiated at both Poles after the Holocene Climate Optimum, from about five millennia ago, which tracked a 40-50Watt/m^2 decline in solar irradiance (@65°N) and a 5°C decline in polar ice core temperatures by 1700CE (i.e., 20% of the Arctic’s absolute interglacial temperature rise). This glaciation peaked during the Little Ice Age, and its early-19th century melt initiation preceded significant human activity. Despite these (de)glaciation facts, the IPCC dismissed with virtual certainty the prospect of glaciation for the next 1,000 years.
  6. Erroneously delayed the next ice by an unprecedented 30,000-50,000 years, while stating the last ice age ended ‘about 10,000 years ago’ (both falsifiable). As Minister of Statistics and Climate Change, James Shaw ignored a major statistical oversight that would normally falsify this critical risk-linked assumption, on three counts.
  7. Only assessed key-risks relative to UNFCCC Article 2 (i.e., theoretical anthropogenic global warming), while it dismissed or omitted catastrophic natural climate change risks most relevant to the 21st century i.e., global cooling, glaciation, climate-forcing volcanism, rapid climate change, and pandemic influenza.
  8. Erroneously dismissed key scientific lessons associated with the Little Ice Age and the rapid climate change events since just before the Holocene Climate Optimum (see point 7’s risks), linked to climate change, and its associated famine, war, and epidemic related catastrophes, civilization destructions and species extinctions.
  9. Omitted to disclose that leading solar activity scientists expert in climate change have warned of a return to a Little Ice Age-like climate during this current grand solar minimum period.
  10. Confirmed that we only have decades of ‘proven’ oil and gas reserves left. Fifty-plus years of proven oil and gas reserves are insufficient to generate the full 21st century global warming that we are fear-mongered with, let alone delay an ice age. With reserves-to-production for oil and gas being less than 100% for most of the last 40 years, peak discovery is history.

If normal science were operating in the climate science field, the IPCC’s radiative forcing theory, forecasts and its key-risk assessment would be falsified.

Earth’s ice age entry after the Holocene Climate Optimum millennia ago, our ‘probable’ 21st century ice age re-entry (P-value <0.05), and a host of catastrophic natural climate change related risks linked to grand solar minimum periods are clearly evident by analyzing the full repertoire of climate, solar activity, volcanic eruption, and pandemic influenza outbreak data (see attached).

While I am sure NZ academia is loathe to speak out against this politicized corruption of ‘normal-science’, as it holds its hand out for government funding, I am here to remind New Zealand science’s governing body, university leadership, and climate science academia that in the event of a natural climate change catastrophe (pandemic influenza included), NZ academia could be complicit in crimes against humanity.

What are you going to do about re-asserting scientific integrity over this politicized corruption of normal science, and ensuring the future safety of New Zealanders and our economy?

Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University) MBA (London Business School)

Advocate for Natural Climate Change Risk-Mitigation: Switching to Renewable Energy, and Implementing Decentralized/Centralized Sustainable Development and Prepandemic Influenza Immunization (Urgently)
FreeBook “Revolution: Ice age Re-entry”: Amazon (https://amzn.to/2PyQsxV), Google Play (http://bit.ly/2JFHz08), Kobo (http://bit.ly/2F3DdRQ), and Researchgate (http://bit.ly/2UnTBju)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlton-brown-13b66232/
Website: http://grandsolarminimum.com
Twitter (for an activist discussion): https://twitter.com/Iceagereentry

Copyright © 2014 Carlton B. Brown of http://grandsolarminimum.com. All Rights are Reserved. You are free to forward this information on to third parties and use this information under CC-BY-SA 4.0 rules.

 

Prevent a UN-led Genocide by natural climate change catastrophes

Dear António Guterres (UN Secretary General) and his Leadership Team (sent by email 28/08/2019)

Your organization via the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) presides over a monstrous corruption of “normal science.” This UNFCCC Article 1 and 2-led corruption resulted in the dismissal or omission of catastrophic natural climate change risks from the IPCC’s key-risk assessment provided to governments (2014). In the event of an unmitigated natural climate change catastrophe this corruption could constitute an act of genocide, majorly impacting the developing nations, the world’s poor, the northern nations, and those nations without a pandemic influenza vaccine manufacturing capability.

To the thousands of government, intergovernmental, human rights and other stakeholders blind-copied in this email it is crucial you comprehend the IPCC’s incriminating disclosures, irrespective of any UN attempt to discredit this information or me. Please report this to your Governments so this global human safety issue can be investigated.

The following hyperlinked document constitutes a scientific refutation of the IPCC’s Article 1 and 2-dictated key-risk assessment. The IPCC’s highly inaccurate climate forecasts falsify its radiative forcing theory, which invalidates its Article 2 contrived key-risk assessment (2014; AR5). With global temperatures declining 0.47°C since early 2016, eight millennia after the Arctic’s Holocene Climate Optimum, it is worrying that we are being fear-mongered with regionally biased hot summer weather reports that hide this global atmospheric and tropospheric cooling fact.

In 2014s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) the IPCC incriminatingly (see document links below):

  1. Projected a 2016-2035 global temperature increase of 0.3°C-0.7°C. Since early 2016 the global temperature declined 0.47°C while CO2 increased 2.8%. António Guterres stated at Monday’s G7 meeting, “2015 to 2019 are on track to be the five hottest years ever recorded” (according to the WMO).This “five hottest years” is synonymous with a 2.5-year rise and 2.5-year decline, but he failed to disclose this global cooling fact.
  2. Disclosed its highly inaccurate climate forecasts: 1986-1998; 84% under-forecasted the global mean surface temperature (GMST). 1998-2012; 97% over-forecasted GMST while 100% failed to predict the 15-year climate hiatus during a period when CO2 increased 8.0%. Carbon dioxide’s rise is known to have lagged behind the temperature rise by 9-12 months during this same three decade period. Points 1 and 2 collectively refute the IPCC’s forecasts and its underlying theory.
  3. Failed to inform governments and society that this global warming phase started in the early 1700s, long before significant human greenhouse gas emissions. This indicates something else ‘controlled’ this 300+ year warming phase (i.e., solar activity; irradiance and magnetized solar wind).
  4. Disclosed its use of global climate indices, that are known to have been sequentially altered by US/UK government agencies. These alterations accentuated the recent global warming, making government agency employees the biggest contributor to ‘anthropogenic’ global warming.
  5. Assessed only key-risks relative to UNFCCC Article 2 (anthropogenic global warming, AGW), while it erroneously dismissed or omitted 21st century-probable catastrophic risks: global cooling, glaciation, climate-forcing volcanism, rapid climate change, and geographically variable climate extremes linked to this grand solar minimum period.
  6. Erroneously delayed the next ice by an unprecedented 30,000-50,000 years, while stating the last ice age ended ‘about 10,000 years ago.’ (both readily falsified)
  7. Erroneously dismissed or omitted key scientific lessons associated with the Little Ice Age and the rapid climate change events since just before the Holocene Climate Optimum (see point 5’s risks) linked to climate change, famine, war, or epidemic related catastrophes, civilization destructions and species extinctions.
  8. Omitted to disclose that leading solar activity scientists expert in climate change have warned of a return to a Little Ice Age-like climate during this current grand solar minimum period.
  9. Omitted to explain the significant glaciation that was initiated at both Poles after the Holocene Climate Optimum, from about five millennia ago. This glaciation peaked during the Little Ice Age, and its early-19th century melt initiation preceded significant human activity. Despite this 5,000 years of glaciation the IPCC dismissed with virtual certainty the prospect of glaciation for the next 1,000 years.
  10. Confirmed without emphasis that we only have decades of ‘proven’ oil and gas reserves left. Fifty-plus years of proven oil and gas reserves are insufficient to generate the full 21st century global warming that we are fear-mongered with, let alone delay an ice age.

The UN’s attempt to switch the world’s energy system is laudable, but not at the expense of leaving catastrophic risks unmitigated. The UN’s AGW fear-mongering is poorly effective at switching the world’s energy system. This ineffectiveness is evidenced by the low single-digit market share for non-hydroelectric renewables in the world’s primary energy mix and its modest 10-year compound annual growth rate, despite decades of effort and trillions of investment-subsidy dollars. Atmospheric carbon dioxide’s unabated rise further highlights the UN/IPCC’s strategic ineffectiveness.

The world needs a new climate change theory to support our essential energy system switch and sustainable development goals, which galvanizes a global sense of unity and commitment to act with urgency. The following scientific revelation will be far more effective at achieving that unified committment than AGW fear-mongering.

Earth’s ice age entry after the Holocene Climate Optimum millennia ago, our probable 21st century ice age re-entry (P-value <0.05), and a host of catastrophic natural climate change related risks during this grand solar minimum period are clearly evident by analyzing the full repertoire of climate, solar activity, volcanic eruption, and pandemic influenza outbreak data (see this data by downloading the hyperlinked Scientific Refutation Document and accompanying Slide Deck PDF Summary). This widely cited peer reviewed data and its basic analysis is missing from the IPCC’s biased key-risk assessment.

What are you going to do about this preventable genocide António Guterres?

Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Carlton Brown BVSc (Massey University, NZ) MBA (London Business School)

Advocate/Activist for Natural Climate Change Risk-Mitigation: Switching to Renewable Energy, and Implementing Decentralized/Centralized Sustainable Development and Prepandemic Influenza Immunization (Urgently)
FreeBook “Revolution: Ice age Re-entry”: Amazon (https://amzn.to/2PyQsxV), Google Play (http://bit.ly/2JFHz08), Kobo (http://bit.ly/2F3DdRQ), and Researchgate (http://bit.ly/2UnTBju)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlton-brown-13b66232/

Website: http://grandsolarminimum.com
Twitter (for an activist discussion): https://twitter.com/Iceagereentry

Copyright © 2014 Carlton B. Brown of http://grandsolarminimum.com. All Rights are Reserved. You are free to forward this information on to third parties and use this information under CC-BY-SA 4.0 rules.

 

TO: antonio.guterres@un.org, sg@un.org, aminaj.mohammed@un.org, marialuiza.viotti@un.org, olga.algayerova@un.org, rola.dashti@un.org, unenvironment-executiveoffice@un.org, Inger.Andersen@unep.org, Volker.Turk@un.org, turk@unhcr.org, turk@un.org, jan.beagle@un.org, david.beasley@wfp.org, serpasoares@un.org, alicia.barcena@cepal.org, secepal@cepal.org, patricia.espinosa@unfccc.int, secretariat@unfccc.int, grete.faremo@unops.org, grete.faremo@jd.dep.no, yury.fedotov@unodc.org, kanem@unfpa.org, filippo.grandi@unhcr.org, unctadsgo@un.org, sgo@unctad.org, undesa@un.org, eca-info@uneca.org, unece_info@un.org, phumzile.mlambo-ngcuka@unwomen.org, nakamitsu@un.org, achim.steiner@undp.org, ryder@ilo.org, audrey.azoulay@unesco.org, a.azoulay@unesco.org, aazoulay@unesco.org
CC: unenvironment-executiveoffice@un.org, Juliette.Biao@un.org, Barbara.Hendrie@unep.org, Jorge.Laguna-Celis@un.org, sonja.leighton-kone@un.org, Gary.Lewis@un.org, Jian.liu@un.org, susan.gardner@un.org, Elizabeth.Mrema@un.org, Ligia.Noronha@un.org, bruno.pozzi@un.org, Naysan.Sahba@un.org, Dechen.Tsering@un.org, satya.tripathi@un.org, Leo.Heileman@un.org, Sami.Dimassi@un.org, ipcc-sec@wmo.int, tsu@ipcc-wg1.universite-paris-saclay.fr, tsu@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, tsu@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, Valerie.masson@lsce.ipsl.fr, pmzhai@cma.gov.cn, n.yassaa@cder.dz, nyassaa@usthb.dz, j.s.fuglestvedt@cicero.oslo.no, greg.flato@ec.gc.ca, driouechfatima@yahoo.fr, e_aldrian@yahoo.com, edvin.aldrian@bmkg.go.id, anna.pirani@universite-paris-saclay.fr, wilfran.moufouma-okia@universite-paris-saclay.fr, clotilde.pean@universite-paris-saclay.fr, robin.matthews@universite-paris-saclay.fr, sarah.connors@universite-paris-saclay.fr, elisabeth.lonnoy@universite-paris-saclay.fr, nicholas.reay@universite-paris-saclay.fr, quan20080141@126.com, hans.poertner@awi.de, andreas.fischlin@env.ethz.ch, Mark.Howden@csiro.au, cmendez@ivic.gob.ve, carlos.menvall@gmail.com, pereirajoy@yahoo.com, pyanda@gmail.com, melinda.tignor@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, elvira.poloczanska@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, bardhyl.rama@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, maike.nicolai@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, andres.alegria@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, jan.petzold@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, nora.weyer@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, okem.ipcc@ukzn.ac.za, anka.freund@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, stefan.weisfeld@ipcc-wg2.awi.de, shuklapr@ahduni.edu.in, vorsatzd@ceu.hu, rpichs@ciem.cu, goutbi@yahoo.com, dkorecha@yahoo.com, ccarraro@unive.it, carlo.carraro@feem.it, carlo.carraro@cmcc.it, IPCC-Sec@wmo.int, reep@aere.org, e.huntley@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, j.portugal@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, m.pathak@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, r.van-diemen@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, suvadip.neogi@ahduni.edu.in, purvi.vyas@ahduni.edu.in, j.malley@ipcc-wg3.ac.uk, sgomm@wmo.int, dsgo@wmo.int, asgo@wmo.int, are_res@wmo.int, wds@wmo.int, cer@wmo.int, cullmann@bafg.de, executiveoffice@unep.org, championsoftheearth@unep.org, billiontreecampaign@unep.org
BCC:

Pin It on Pinterest