Geoff Sherrington

Name: Geoff Sherrington
Country: Australia

What is your background?
Two years at Royal Australian Air Force Academy to be test pilot (terminated by car crash); two years plant nutrition research CSIRO; five years manager or part owner of analytical chemistry laboratories; twenty years mineral exploration with Peko-Wallsend Limited; two years research high-powered CO2 lasers in industry and thirty years objecting to faulty Climate Change science, mainly by blogging.

Since when and why are you interested in climate change?
In 1992 I was involved with that famous Phil Jones email: “Why should I send you my data …”. That email confirmed my existing deductions that there was poor quality, corrupt science in parts of the Global Warming/Climate Change movement. It had to be opposed.

How did your views on climate change evolve?
There was never an epiphany because I never had another view that accepted the emerging, poor quality research of Climate Change that had excessive political consequences.

Is climate change a big issue in your country and how do you notice this?
In Australia, the present Federal Government has been captured by The Establishment view of Climate Change. Net zero carbon by 2050 is policy. Measures are under way to reduce gas consumption, coal is being phased out, nuclear remains prohibited. ‘Renewables’ are wrongly classed as the cheapest form of electricity generation. There is overkill of new renewables subsidized by governments.

What would climate policy ideally look like in your view?
There is no better economic system than free enterprise encouraged by government. Electricity generation must be considered for any form that investors select. Governments have no place picking winners in such fields of commerce.

The science that promotes Climate Change is faulty and wrong in critical aspects. Predictions of climate crisis have persistently failed. CO2 and other GHG cannot cause much atmospheric heat as they are maxed out radiatively and/or too dilute. Heat from natural processes drives CO2 levels in air, not entirely the converse. Climate Change is being used as an illegitimate means of social control of people.

What is your motivation to sign the CLINTEL World Climate Declaration?
It is vital that the best science about Climate Change is publicized in clear terms and adopted officially, with objections to existing faulty science stated. Clintel is doing this. Support is offered.

What question did we forget?
What motivates officials to accept faulty science about Climate Change and its social consequences?