Environment
Climate Scientists declare the climate “emergency” is at an end

The Chamber of Deputies, Prague, Czechia
News release from the Climate Intelligence Group (Clintel)
Climate scientists have issued a shock declaration that the “climate emergency” is over.
A two-day climate conference in Prague, organized by the Czech division of the international Climate Intelligence Group (Clintel), which took place on November 12-13 in the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic in Prague, “declares and affirms that the imagined and imaginary ‘climate emergency’ is at an end”.
The communiqué, drafted by the eminent scientists and researchers who spoke at the conference, makes clear that for several decades climate scientists have systematically exaggerated the influence of CO2 on global temperature.
The high-level scientific conference also declared:
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which excludes participants and published papers disagreeing with its narrative, fails to comply with its own error-reporting protocol and draws conclusions some of which are dishonest, should be forthwith dismantled.”
The declaration supports the conclusions of the major Clintel report The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC [presented to the Conference by Marcel Crok, Clintel’s co-founder].
Moreover, the scientists at the conference declared that even if all nations moved straight to net zero emissions, by the 2050 target date the world would be only about 0.1 C cooler than with no emissions reduction.
So far, the attempts to mitigate climate change by international agreements such as the Paris Agreement have made no difference to our influence on climate, since nations such as Russia and China, India and Pakistan continue greatly to expand their combustion of coal, oil and gas.
The cost of achieving that 0.1 C reduction in global warming would be $2 quadrillion, equivalent to 20 years’ worldwide gross domestic product.
Finally, the conference “calls upon the entire scientific community to cease and desist from its persecution of scientists and researchers who disagree with the current official narrative on climate change and instead to encourage once again the long and noble tradition of free, open and uncensored scientific research, investigation, publication and discussion”.
The full text of the communiqué follows:
The International Scientific Conference of the Climate Intelligence Group (Clintel), in the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic in Prague assembled on the Twelfth and Thirteenth Days of November 2024, has resolved and now declares as follows, that is to say –
- The modest increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide that has taken place since the end of the Little Ice Age has been net-beneficial to humanity.
- Foreseeable future increases in greenhouse gases in the air will probably also prove net-beneficial.
- The rate and amplitude of global warming have been and will continue to be appreciably less than climate scientists have long predicted.
- The Sun, and not greenhouse gases, has contributed and will continue to contribute the overwhelming majority of global temperature.
- Geological evidence compellingly suggests that the rate and amplitude of global warming during the industrial era are neither unprecedented nor unusual.
- Climate models are inherently incapable of telling us anything about how much global warming there will be or about whether or to what extent the warming has a natural or anthropogenic cause.
- Global warming will likely continue to be slow, small, harmless and net-beneficial.
- There is broad agreement among the scientific community that extreme weather events have not increased in frequency, intensity or duration and are in future unlikely to do so.
- Though global population has increased fourfold over the past century, annually averaged deaths attributable to any climate-related or weather-related event have declined by 99%.
- Global climate-related financial losses, expressed as a percentage of global annual gross domestic product, have declined and continue to decline notwithstanding the increase in built infrastructure in harm’s way.
- Despite trillions of dollars spent chiefly in Western countries on emissions abatement, global temperature has continued to rise since 1990.
- Even if all nations, rather than chiefly western nations, were to move directly and together from the current trajectory to net zero emissions by the official target year of 2050, the global warming prevented by that year would be no more than 0.05 to 0.1 Celsius.
- If the Czech Republic, the host of this conference, were to move directly to net zero emissions by 2050, it would prevent only 1/4000 of a degree of warming by that target date.
- Based pro rata on the estimate by the UK national grid authority that preparing the grid for net zero would cost $3.8 trillion (the only such estimate that is properly-costed), and on the fact that the grid accounts for 25% of UK emissions, and that UK emissions account for 0.8% of global emissions, the global cost of attaining net zero would approach $2 quadrillion, equivalent to 20 years’ global annual GDP.
- On any grid where the installed nameplate capacity of wind and solar power exceeds the mean demand on that grid, adding any further wind or solar power will barely reduce grid CO2 emissions but will greatly increase the cost of electricity and yet will reduce the revenues earned by both new and existing wind and solar generators.
- The resources of techno-metals required to achieve global net zero emissions are entirely insufficient even for one 15-year generation of net zero infrastructure, so that net zero is in practice unattainable.
- Since wind and solar power are costly, intermittent and more environmentally destructive per TWh generated than any other energy source, governments should cease to subsidize or to prioritize them, and should instead expand coal, gas and, above, all nuclear generation.
- The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which excludes participants and published papers disagreeing with its narrative, fails to comply with its own error-reporting protocol and draws conclusions some of which are dishonest, should be forthwith dismantled.
Therefore, this conference hereby declares and affirms that the imagined and imaginary “climate emergency” is at an end.
This conference calls upon the entire scientific community to cease and desist from its persecution of scientists and researchers who disagree with the current official narrative on climate change and instead to encourage once again the long and noble tradition of free, open and uncensored scientific research, investigation, publication and discussion.
Given under our signs manual this Thirteenth Day of November in the Year of our Lord Two Thousand and Twenty-Four.
Pavel Kalenda, Czech Republic [Conference Chairman]
Guus Berkhout, The Netherlands [Co-founder, Clintel]
Marcel Crok, The Netherlands [Co-founder, Clintel]
Lord Monckton, United Kingdom
Valentina Zharkova, United Kingdom
Milan Šálek, Czech Republic
Václav Procházka, Czech Republic
Gregory Wrightstone, United States (see below)
Jan Pokorný, Czech Republic
Szarka László, Hungary
James Croll, United Kingdom
Tomas Furst, Czech Republic
Gerald Ratzer, Canada
Douglas Pollock, Chile
Henri Masson, Belgium
Miroslav Žáček, Czech Republic
Jan-Erik Solheim, Norway
Video below from interview with Gregory Wrightstone.
Better to turn around halfway, than to get lost completely
Not climate change but climate policy is the main threat for the prosperity of western societies at this moment. The Clintel Foundation has stated, with a global network of 2000 scientists and experts, that there is no climate emergency. Western leaders, however, have all voted in favour of Net Zero targets for 2050, which will have a disastrous effect on our economy and therefore our prosperity. Meanwhile, the UN is increasing its effort to fight ‘disinformation’, which in practice means less open debate and more censoring of alternative views.
Climate policies are a threat for entrepreneurs and it enters deeper and deeper into the private life of citizens. Wind turbines of close to 300 meters in height industrialise our countrysides, harming the environment,, biodiversity and public health. House owners are forced to replace their gas heaters by costly heat pumps, leading to rising energy bills. More and more cities reduce speed limits to 30 kms per hour.
There is no support base among the population for all these costly measures but our political leaders so far ignore these objections. Sooner or later the tide will turn, because these policies are unfeasible and unaffordable. Clintel wants to speed up this process by making both citizens and political leaders aware of all the pitfalls. Clintel receives no funding from the government nor from the Postcode Lottery or the industry. We therefore ask citizens and small businesses to support us in our mission.
Your support will be used to:
* Explain in all details there is no climate emergency. No one should be afraid of climate change. We use our websites and social media channels to spread this information and also give interviews in the media.
* Analyse and criticize IPCC reports. We check them for alarmism and one-sidedness. In 2023 we published the book The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC. We confront the IPCC with our results and will force them to respond to our criticism.
* Raise awareness for the negative side-effects of the current climate policies, both in terms of cost and impact on humans and the environment.
* Intervene in high profile climate court cases such as the one between Friends of the Earth and Shell in The Netherlands. Climate policy should be discussed in Parliaments, not in the courts.
If you share our views, please consider to support us through a (monthly) donation or by becoming Friend of Clintel.
Environment
Experiments to dim sunlight will soon be approved by UK government: report

From LifeSiteNews
Dimming the sunlight poses serious dangers, including by blocking vitamin D, potentially reducing rainfall, and releasing toxins into the environment.
Experiments aimed at dimming sunlight with the stated goal of reducing “global warming” will be approved by the U.K. government within weeks, according to The Telegraph.
Professor Mark Symes, the program director for Aria (Advanced Research and Invention Agency), said the organization has planned “small controlled outdoor experiments on particular approaches” to sunlight dimming.
These trials could include “injecting aerosols into the atmosphere, or brightening clouds,” which are both Sunlight Reflection Methods (SRM). Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB) involves spraying sea-salt particles into the sky to make low-lying clouds more reflective.
It is unclear what kind of aerosols are being considered for the trials, although according to geoengineering.global, sulfate aerosols as well as black carbon, metallic aluminum, aluminum oxide, and barium titanate aerosols are “being considered for this solar radiation management approach.” Metallic aerosols in particular would raise health concerns for human beings as well as animal and plant life.
Symes has insisted to the public that the experiments won’t release toxic substances but has not specified what they will involve. “We have strong requirements around the length of time experiments can run for and their reversibility and we won’t be funding the release of any toxic substances to the environment,” he said.
Geoengineering.global admits that stratospheric aerosol injection poses dangers such as the possibility of reduced rainfall in certain areas, with accompanying “loss of crops and access to freshwater.”
According to The Telegraph, researchers have said in recent years that pollution above shipping routes has caused clouds above them to become brighter than normal, bringing about an overall dimming effect by reflecting sunlight back into the atmosphere.
While the scientific establishment often claims there is a “consensus” that the earth is warming, and, moreover, at a dangerous rate, six top international scientists released findings in 2022 that projected a cooling of the Northern hemisphere until the 2050s, and, by extension, the rest of the globe.
Most compellingly, over 1,100 scientists and professionals signed a “World Climate Declaration (WCD)“ in 2022 declaring that “There is no climate emergency,” even if the globe is warming. They point out that “Earth’s climate has varied for as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm periods,” and add that “warming is far slower than predicted.”
They also note that “there is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and such-like natural disasters, or making them more frequent.”
The question of global warming aside, the effects of dimmed sunlight from even short-term experiments could have detrimental effects on mental and physical health. Sunlight is a critical source of vitamin D, which is needed to help defend against infections. Those who live above the 37th parallel are already said to be exposed to insufficient amounts of sunlight for vitamin D production during the fall and winter.
Dimmed sunlight could also put people at increased risk of Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), a type of depression linked to reduced levels of sunlight during the winter. According to researchers, the mechanism behind SAD involves lowered serotonin levels and a disrupted circadian rhythm caused by lack of sunlight.
Censorship Industrial Complex
Misinformed: Hyped heat deaths and ignored cold deaths

From the Fraser Institute
Whenever there’s a heatwave—whether at home or abroad—the media loves to splash it. Politicians and campaigners then jump in to warn that climate change is at fault, and urge us to cut carbon emissions. But they are only telling us one-tenth of the story and giving terrible advice.
Global warming indeed causes more heat waves, and these raise the risk that more people die because of heat. That much is true. But higher temperatures also cause a reduction in cold temperatures, reducing the risk that people die from the cold. Almost everywhere in the world—not just Canada—cold kills 5-15 times more people than heat.
Heat gets a lot of attention both because of its obvious link to climate change and because it is immediately visible—meaning it is photogenic for the media. Heat kills within a few days of temperatures getting too high, because it alters the fluid and electrolytic balance in weaker, often older people.
Cold, on the other hand, slowly kills over months. At low temperatures, the body constricts outer blood vessels to conserve heat, driving up blood pressure. High blood pressure is the world’s leading killer, causing 19 per cent of all deaths.
Depending on where we live, taking into account infrastructure like heating and cooling, along with vehicles and clothes to keep us comfortable, there is a temperature at which deaths will be at a minimum. If it gets warmer or colder, more people will die.
A recent Lancet study shows that if we count all the additional deaths from too-hot temperatures globally, heat kills nearly half a million people each year. But too-cold temperatures are more than nine-times deadlier, killing over 4.5 million people.
In Canada, unsurprisingly, cold is even deadlier, killing more than 12 times more than heat. Each year, about 1,400 Canadians die from heat, but more than 17,000 die because of the cold.
Every time there is a heatwave, climate activists will tell you that global warming is an existential problem and we need to switch to renewables. And yes, the terrible heat dome in BC in June 2021 tragically killed 450-600 people and was likely made worse by global warming. But in that same year, the cold in BC killed 2,500 people, yet these deaths made few headlines.
Moreover, the advice from climate activists—that we should hasten the switch away from fossil fuels—is deeply problematic. Switching to renewables drives up energy prices. How do people better survive heat? With air conditioning. Over the last century, despite the temperature increasing, the US saw a remarkable drop in heat deaths because of more air conditioning. Making electricity for air conditioning more expensive means especially poorer people cannot afford to stay cool, and more people die.
Likewise, access to more heating has made our homes less deadly in winter, driving down cold mortality over the 20th century. One study shows that cheap gas heating in the late 2000s saved 12,500 Americans from dying of cold each year. Making heating more expensive will consign at least 12,500 people to die each year because they can no longer afford to keep warm.
One thing climate campaigners never admit is that current temperature rises actually make fewer people die overall from heat and cold. While rising temperatures drive more heat deaths, they also reduce the number of cold deaths — and because cold deaths are much more prevalent, this reduces total deaths significantly.
The only global estimate shows that in the last two decades, rising temperatures have increased heat deaths by 0.21 percentage points but reduced cold deaths by 0.51 percentage points. Rising temperatures have reduced net global death by 0.3 per cent, meaning some 166,000 deaths have been avoided. The researchers haven’t done the numbers for Canada alone, but combined with the US, increased temperatures have caused an extra 5,000 heat deaths annually, but reduced the number of cold deaths by 14,000.

If temperatures keep rising, cold deaths can only be reduced so much. Eventually, of course, total deaths will increase again. But a new near-global Nature study shows that, looking only at the impact of climate change, the number of total dead from heat and cold will stay lower than today almost up to a 3oC temperature increase, which is more than currently expected by the end of the century.
People claim that we will soon be in a world that is literally too hot and humid to live in, using something called the “wet bulb” temperature. But under realistic assumptions, the actual number of people who by century’s end will live in unlivable circumstances is still zero.
The incessant focus on tens or hundreds of people dying in for instance Indian heatwaves makes us forget that even in India, cold is a much bigger challenge. While heat kills 89,000 people each year, cold kills seven times more at 632,000 every year. Yet, you would never know with the current climate information we get.
Hearing only the alarmist side of heat and cold deaths not only scares people—especially younger generations—but points us toward ineffective policies that drive up energy costs and let more people die from lack of adequate protection against both heat and cold.
Bjørn Lomborg
-
Alberta11 hours ago
Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion
-
Entertainment2 days ago
Pedro Pascal launches attack on J.K. Rowling over biological sex views
-
International10 hours ago
History in the making? Trump, Zelensky hold meeting about Ukraine war in Vatican ahead of Francis’ funeral
-
conflict2 days ago
Trump tells Zelensky: Accept peace or risk ‘losing the whole country’
-
Alberta9 hours ago
Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Poilievre Campaigning To Build A Canadian Economic Fortress
-
Automotive2 days ago
Canadians’ Interest in Buying an EV Falls for Third Year in a Row
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
As PM Poilievre would cancel summer holidays for MP’s so Ottawa can finally get back to work