Are humans responsible for GLOBAL CLIMATE WARMING CHANGES!
I've read a half dozen of the news articles about the IPCC data summary, and the media spin makes me sick. The fact that is that this has been the coldest summer in the northern hemisphere in decades, and the fact that 1998 was the warmest recorded year in their survey is buried deep in the analysis...well, it exposes how bankrupt the entire "global warming" bullshit really is.
The REAL problem would be a new ice age- we are in an interglacial period, and temps are still lower than the last IP, but the trends show a drop that would cripple us- if the temps dropped 5C the world would starve. At least a warmer planet would give us enough food to live- a Hoth-like planet would kill billions!
On Friday the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change delivers its latest verdict on the state of man-made global warming. Though the details are a secret, one thing is clear: the version of events you will see and hear in much of the media, especially from partis pris organisations like the BBC, will be the opposite of what the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report actually says.
Already we have had a taste of the nonsense to come: a pre-announcement to the effect that “climate scientists” are now “95 per cent certain” that humans are to blame for climate change; an evidence-free declaration by the economist who wrote the discredited Stern Report that the computer models cited by the IPCC “substantially underestimate” the scale of the problem; a statement by the panel’s chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, that “the scientific evidence of… climate change has strengthened year after year”.
As an exercise in bravura spin, these claims are up there with Churchill’s attempts to reinvent the British Expeditionary Force’s humiliating retreat from Dunkirk as a victory. In truth, though, the new report offers scant consolation to those many alarmists whose careers depend on talking up the threat. It says not that they are winning the war to persuade the world of the case for catastrophic anthropogenic climate change – but that the battle is all but lost.
At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest. So modest, indeed, that it has fallen outside the lowest parameters of the IPCC’s prediction range. The computer models, in short, are bunk.
To a few distinguished scientists, this will hardly come as news. For years they have insisted that “sensitivity” – the degree to which the climate responds to increases in atmospheric CO₂ – is far lower than the computer models imagined. In the past, their voices have been suppressed by the bluster and skulduggery we saw exposed in the Climategate emails. From grant-hungry science institutions and environmentalist pressure groups to carbon traders, EU commissars, and big businesses with their snouts in the subsidies trough, many vested interests have much to lose should the global warming gravy train be derailed.
This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean, it cannot come up with a convincing explanation why. Coming from a sceptical blog none of this would be surprising. But from the IPCC, it’s dynamite: the equivalent of the Soviet politburo announcing that command economies may not after all be the most efficient way of allocating resources.
Which leaves the IPCC in a dilemma: does it ’fess up and effectively put itself out of business? Or does it brazen it out for a few more years, in the hope that a compliant media and an eco-brainwashed populace will be too stupid to notice? So far, it looks as if it prefers the second option – a high-risk strategy. Gone are the days when all anybody read of its Assessment Reports were the sexed-up “Summary for Policymakers”. Today, thanks to the internet, sceptical inquirers such as Donna Laframboise (who revealed that some 40 per cent of the IPCC’s papers came not from peer-reviewed journals but from Greenpeace and WWF propaganda) will be going through every chapter with a fine toothcomb.
Al Gore’s “consensus” is about to be holed below the water-line – and those still aboard the SS Global Warming are adjusting their positions. Some, such as scientist Judith Curry of Georgia Tech, have abandoned ship. She describes the IPCC’s stance as “incomprehensible”. Others, such as the EU’s Climate Commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, steam on oblivious. Interviewed last week by the Telegraph’s Bruno Waterfield, she said: “Let’s say that science, some decades from now, said: 'We were wrong, it was not about climate’, would it not in any case have been good to do many of the things you have to do in order to combat climate change?” If she means needlessly driving up energy prices, carpeting the countryside with wind turbines and terrifying children about a problem that turns out to have been imaginary, then most of us would probably answer “No”.
Please, I will respond with respect and facts.
I would like to engage intelligent DLrs on this topic. It is very important. Why would you be so rude?
Because You Are ...
R5, I wish I could push you down a flight of stairs...
OP the vast majority of real scientists say that climate change is man made. You aren't one of them. I believe them. I don't believe you.
What the fuck has Winston Churchill got to do with this?
Did you go to bible school OP? You can tell us, we won't laugh.
The vast majority of the scientists that support AGW theory are NOT climatologists.
The vast majority of scientists that actually study the climate, and spend their lives trying to figure out the variations...well, they think AGW is bullshit.
Humans are too insignificant, despite our bombs and reactors and movie stars and Kanye West, to really hurt the EARTH.
Dude, (or dudette?) look at FUKUSHIMA! That is 1000x worse than any cars or coal-fired elec-plants! Why worry about CO2 when Cesium 137 is in the fish you eat or water you drink?
Why are normally smart gay men and women so defensive of the government when it comes to their own rights, but so quick to expose the pure evil of that government when it doesn't?
Our government is evil. It is fucked, and cannot be fixed- radical decentralization is the only cure. Make each state sovereign,and then make each county within the state sovereign.
R8 people don't understand how simple it all really is.
mind rules the heart .it's all about money.
that's why most people are plebs.and always will be.
scientists will say what the money people want them to say.
everything is about money.
when you understand that,you are FREE.
i'm a little cold at the moment
The IPCC report shows that "AGW" is nonexistent and that the hundreds of billions WASTED on mitigating it need to be accounted for and repaid to the people.
The government has stolen hundreds of billions from us to "pay for" this environmental bullshit--- they need to pay us back!!!
Shut up, that's why.
Who is more irritating and misinformed?
People who continue to deny global warming by confusing climate change with the local weather report.
People who keep saying The Theory of Evolution is just a theory.
People who think some big nasty secret about 9/11 is being covered up by the US government.
R14 can I add to your list anyone who says " wake up and smell the coffee sheeple!". And the Diana nuts. And the creationists. Fuck them and the dinosaur they rode in on.
There hasn't been any rise in temps over the past 15 years. Sun spots control our weather, not man. "The climate change agenda is designed to tax us to death.
Antarctic Sea Ice currently at a historic record level.
Arctic Sea ice summer minimum is a 60% increase over last year.
I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence. They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.
Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean. However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans. However, it is this heat transport that plays a major role in natural internal variability of climate, and the IPCC assertions that observed warming can be attributed to man depend crucially on their assertion that these models accurately simulate natural internal variability. Thus, they now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified.
Finally, in attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about. It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.
Yes, Global Warming (aka "Climate Change") is real.
Yes, Humans are a significant factor in it.
Yes, the deniers are all parroting cherry-picked factoids that support their contention that there's some grand conspiracy... usually factoids they don't really understand but just heard from some fossil-fuel-funded highly biased and spun source, or just think it's the politically "correct" position to take because they hate Democrats and Liberals (and by extension, facts and reality).
You can see above some posts from ignorant denialists. You can spot them because of their conspiratorial tones ("things they don't want you to know!"), and the fact that they seize on one or two talking points, and parrot them (with links to biased sources like Murdoch sites or Koch-funded sites) and never actually respond or react to posts that debunk whatever they keep reposting mindlessly.
The science is confirmed. It is accurate. It is "cross confirmed" across different branches of science, with ALL available data supporting the conclusion.
Yet somehow, tin-hats think that tens of thousands of scientists and millions of gigabytes of data are all somehow being coerced into lying in order to get "grant money" from governments, or something. Seriously, think about what they're proposing and it really makes absolutely no sense.
Meanwhile, the fossil fuel industry pours billions into climate-change denying "think-tanks" and media sources. Follow the money indeed.
Humans contribute only 3% of Global CO2.
Remove all people tomorrow, and CO2 is STILL INCREASING BY NATURAL MEANS.
CO2 does not drive climate.
Every predictive computer model using global warming "THEORY" has failed.
R20 lies like a rug, parrots spin and half-truths and flat-out false-hoods.
But, you know, they're SO much smarter than every single scientist in the world (minus the, what, 3% that are bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry?)
Really? Every single scientist in the world?
What are you 10?
R22, do you have a reading comprehension problem? It's a well known fact that 97% of scientists agree with and support the conclusion that Climate Change is real and caused at list in a significant part by human activity. Just like 97% of scientists agree that evolution is real.
It's not really a question that's open for debate any more. It's been established. It's the right-wing uneducated morons that keep trying to rehash the debates they've already lost and that the facts do not support... evolution, homosexuality being a 'choice', climate change, and on and on.
Anybody who thinks the increase in Antarctic sea ice is a good thing really doesn't know diddly about climate change. Nothing is more dangerous, in both the short and long term, than the disastrous shrinking of the land ice in Antarctica and elsewhere, and its displacement into the oceans. If you want an explanation, consider learning Archimedes law.
[quote]It's a well known fact that 97% of scientists agree with and support the conclusion that Climate Change is real and caused at list in a significant part by human activity.
[bold]Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring '97-Percent Consensus' Claims[/bold]
Totally shocked that most replies are supportive- I expected to be tarred, feathered, bedazzled, sheared and tasered!
Yes, R25- the number of CLIMATOLOGISTS that believe humans are causing GW is small- they study the data and can see that politics, not science, controls the debate. They are becoming more emboldened by the day, risking grant money and prestige to speak out about bullshit.
R24- WTF? More ice equals rising sea level? Are you "special?"
R23- please cite some sources, or STFU.
R20- that was my "Archimedes Moment" - when I read a white paper about how much CO2 & SO2 volcanoes released each year it made me question AGW, and led me "down the rabbit hole" to discovering how sunspots are FAR more culpable in temperature changes.
R16&17- this summer has been the coldest in decades. The fact that the fools at the IPCC can spin this as a result of "Climate Change" shows how desperate and scared they are.
R24 - Rising sea levels as a result of global warming are a huge threat. But the Antarctic isn't really the problem.
On the other hand land ice in the Artic and Greenland separating and ending up in the ocean could raise levels.
But also as average water temperatures increase the water expands - raising water levels.
OP - please just ride your dinosaur into the sunset.
Please make sense. More ice is a BAD thing?
R28 - Who said anything about more ice?
Land ice - or ice covering land doesn't impact ocean levels. Because it is on land not in the ocean .
Temperatures rise - and thin sheets of land ice separate. They fall into the ocean - and cause water levels to rise.
Really - have you never put ice cubes in a glass of water?
Well then, is all science just bought-off studies concocted to make money? Is climate change study a huge corrupt cash cow raking in more cash than fossil fuel industries?
I have a hard time believing this.
MIT professor Dr. Richard Lindzen, R18? The same Dr. Richard Linddzen who the tobacco industry paid to claim there was no connection between cigarettes and lung cancer?
The same Richard Lindzen who charges the oil and gas industries $10K per day for "consulting fees"?
[bold]THAT[/bold]Richard Lindzen? A bought and paid whore for Phillip Morris and ExxonMobil?
Like the projecting deniers keep saying, follow the money.
[quote]Our government is evil. It is fucked, and cannot be fixed- radical decentralization is the only cure. Make each state sovereign,and then make each county within the state sovereign.
Oh, dear fucking god. The climate change denial troll is the Libertarian Idiot Troll(TM). Pity us.
In a way, it makes sense that a climate change denier would also be a bought and paid corporate whore. Who else besides corporations would have such a strong vested interest in keeping the impending climate catastrophe on track?
And again, as always, Libertarians are dumber than a box of hammers.
[bold]Top MIT scientist: Newest UN climate report is ‘hilariously’ flawed[/bold]
Not all scientists are panicking about global warming — one of them finds the alarmism “hilarious.”
A top climate scientist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology lambasted a new report by the UN’s climate bureaucracy that blamed mankind as the main cause of global warming and whitewashed the fact that there has been a hiatus in warming for the last 15 years.
“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence,” Dr. Richard Lindzen told Climate Depot, a global warming skeptic news site. “They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.”