Page 19 of 145 FirstFirst ... 914151617181920212223242969119 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 2881

Thread: Lectro was RIGHT--post1626--(climate related)

  1. #361

  2. #362
    Lindzen has primarily been pleading with the CO2 zealots to just slow down hasn't he? Yet...people feel the need to discredit even that. It's like this Bz situation...if you're not full tilt bozo BzOutt and hate the guy.....you must be a Bz lover. No room for anything else.

    We're throwing a lot of money at understanding the processes...which are obviously way more complex than the CO2 crowd wants(ed) to admit. Like Lindzen, I really don't understand why that can't just be enough for now while we pick apart what is actually going on. The projected temp increases using their models have gotten smaller and smaller (and they have ALWAYS overshot the actual number). The data continues to point to other drivers being heavily involved if not the primary cause, and not related to human activity. The trend continues away from CO2 as the primary cause or even enough of a contribution to warrant immediate and drastic action.

    Back when people were saying 100% CO2 and it would cause a 6° rise by the end of the century it sounded bad so I can see why everyone got all hyped up. Now when it's a 1.5° rise and CO2 is at worst a 25% contributor meaning at worst humans **might** contribute to a 0.38°C rise by the end of the century (94% drop)....and that's likely even overblown based on the model history and the models can't factor in future solar changes....I don't get the urgency at all and I don't get the need to attack people who aren't believers. Continue to research the situation. Continue to seek/develop cheap technology to scrub CO2 just in case. Continue to look at alternative energy sources like we have been.

    But like what Cohle says in True Detective....we're a creature of illusion and our propensity for illusion can be easily manipulated. The story that humans fucked up the planet is loved by many on the left.....any way they can get it. You couldn't wrap it up any better than this CO2 theory: an unprovable theory that could render us extinct!

  3. #363
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever RJKarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    67,018
    If a so called scientist testifies to Congress saying his scientific method shows no direct link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. every other alleged experiment he does has to be questioned.

    Nothing he alleges should ever be taken seriously.

  4. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by RJKarl View Post
    If a so called scientist testifies to Congress saying his scientific method shows no direct link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. every other alleged experiment he does has to be questioned.

    Nothing he alleges should ever be taken seriously.
    RJ, you just keep twisting and lying. It's what you are good at

  5. #365
    The American Spectator itemized no less than $6 million in contributions to fund Michael Mann’s global warming fakery–240 times as much as Heartland got from the Charles Koch Foundation. Worse, most if not all of Mann’s grants were ripped off from taxpayers against their will.

    The fact is that global warming alarmism is a well-funded industry. The United States government alone has contributed billions of dollars to promote global warming alarmists, and nothing to the voices of scientific sanity. What is going on here is that the alarmists, knowing their science is shaky at best, cannot tolerate diversity of thought. They know that if critics are allowed to exist, their “scientific” house of cards will come tumbling down. So they must silence every dissenting voice; otherwise, the gravy train might end.

    It isn’t pretty, but that is what happens when you make science subservient to a political agenda.

  6. #366
    Resident Astrophysicist
    TWDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    22,060
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by pourdeac View Post
    The story that humans fucked up the planet is loved by many on the left.....any way they can get it. You couldn't wrap it up any better than this CO2 theory: an unprovable theory that could render us extinct!
    Disregard global warming for a second. Do you think we have fucked up the planet at all?

  7. #367
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever RJKarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    67,018
    So The Guardian and many other sites are all lying about Lindzen denying the link between cigarettes and lung cancer?

    The guy is a joke and a whore.

  8. #368
    Quote Originally Posted by TWDeac View Post
    Disregard global warming for a second. Do you think we have fucked up the planet at all?
    I do.
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  9. #369
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever RJKarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    67,018
    "In a 2001 profile in Newsweek, journalist Fred Guterl wrote that Lindzen "clearly relishes the role of naysayer. He'll even expound on how weakly lung cancer is linked to cigarette smoking."[14] James Hansen recalls meeting Lindzen whilst testifying before the Vice President's Climate Task Force: "I considered asking Lindzen if he still believed there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer. He had been a witness for tobacco companies decades earlier, questioning the reliability of statistical connections between smoking and health problems. But I decided that would be too confrontational. When I met him at a later conference, I did ask that question, and was surprised by his response: He began rattling off all the problems with the date relating smoking to helath problems, which was closely analagous to his views of climate data."

    You can't take him seriously on anything scientific if this is his scientific position on cigs and lung cancer.

  10. #370
    Lindzen is responding to statistical analysis of 2nd hand smoke.

    You are socialist masquerading as a moral agent (hence your own extreme religiosity) who I am more than happy to do battle with.

    Fact: No Global increase in mean temperatures for over 17 years.

  11. #371
    Let's take a look at the phenomenally bad predictions made by the warmists...I assume that their own egregious errors can be examined?

    http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/

    Recently, the world's major climate agencies published their year-end empirical datasets for global temperatures.

    How does actual climate reality compare with the IPCC's 2013 proclamation that their "extremely likely" predictions of global temperatures? With 95% certainty, embarrassingly bad. (click on chart to enlarge)

    The chart on the left is a plot of the IPCC's RCP4.5 model output versus the climate reality, as represented by the UK's HadCRUT4 global monthly temperature dataset. The bright red and blue curves are simple 3-year moving averages that visually removes all the monthly gyrations.

    It is clear that the IPCC's state-of-the-art 2013 climate models start diverging from climate reality around the 1995 period. And the divergence continues to widen to the point where one could conclude that any future output will be extremely unlikely to be of any value to policymakers.

    Put another way, these billion-dollar, taxpayer-funded super-computer model simulations have performed atrociously, and are entirely worthless at predicting future climate scenarios.

    How did this happen?

    While the IPCC's associated climate "experts" are going through their own set of mental gyrations to explain the abysmal climate model and AGW hypothesis performances, two scientists explain how this failure was produced - article number one and article number two.

    If you are curious as to the 'whys' of IPCC climate consensus failure, these articles are a must read. For those short on time, though, in a nutshell a compiled summary of reasons for failure:

    cloud ignorance
    ocean ignorance
    solar/cosmic ignorance
    natural climate variability ignorance
    chaos ignorance
    de-emphasis of large uncertainty
    dogmatic co2-AGW orthodoxy
    herd consensus
    hubris
    financial/security incentives
    political agendas
    Until the above are adequately addressed and fixed, the probability that climate models will predict with accuracy that policymakers can actually rely on is extremely unlikely, with 99.9% certainty.

    Previous climate model and modern temperature charts.

    Websites to download HadCRUT4 dataset and RCP4.5 dataset. Don't know how to chart in Excel? It's easy. Go here to learn how.

  12. #372
    Jack Van Impe has nothing on these jack-legged Armageddon peddlers. 117 years of climate catastrophe predictions...

    The following quotations are from people who believe that the economic activities of our industrial way of life are upsetting the normal rhythms of our climatic system, and, if not corrected, will lead to horrific damage in the future. They include environmentalists, political activists and the occasional scientist. Many of these people have been good enough to provide dates for their predictions, or at least a general time frame for the damage that is likely to occur. These are the most useful predictions because they can be tested against the trials of time. Vague generalities (like those frequently issued by the IPCC) are not at all helpful. In future, therefore, I would hope that when doomsday predictions are made, they will be accompanied by dates or some concrete time frame for their accomplishment.
    I have gleaned these quotations from my reading and from the internet. One internet source was particularly valuable titled “117 Years of Failed Climate and Environmental Predictions.” I encourage all readers to consult that wonderful site. The only way I can improve upon it is by continually updating these predictions (and many are coming due in the very near future). Regards, Richard Barrett
    —————————————–
    March 20, 2000, from The Independent, According to Dr David Viner of the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, snowfall in Britain would become “a very rare and exciting event” and “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”
    ——————————————-
    September 2006, Arnold Schwarzenegger signing California’s anti-emmissions law, “We simply must do everything in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late…The science is clear. The global warming debate is over.”
    ———————————————
    1990 Actress Meryl Streep ”By the year 2000–that’s less than ten years away–earth’s climate will be warmer than it’s been in over 100,000 years. If we don’t do something, there’ll be enormous calamities in a very short time.”
    ———————————————-
    April 2008, Media Mogul Ted Turner on Charlie Rose (On not taking drastic action to correct global warming) ”Not doing it will be catastrophic. We’ll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals.” [Strictly speaking, this is not a failed prediction. It won't be until at least 2048 that our church-going and pie-baking neighbors come after us for their noonday meal. But the prediction is so bizarre that I include it here.]
    —————————————-
    January 1970 Life Magazine ”Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support …the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
    ———————————————-
    Earth Day 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist ”At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
    ———————————————–
    Earth Day 1970 Kenneth Watt, ecologist ”The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
    ———————————————–
    April 28, 1975 Newsweek ”There are ominous signs that Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically….The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it….The central fact is that…the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down….If the climate change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic.”
    ———————————————
    1976 Lowell Ponte in “The Cooling,” ”This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000.”
    ———————————————–
    July 9, 1971, Washington Post “In the next 50 years fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to ten years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”
    ————————————————
    June, 1975, Nigel Calder in International Wildlife ” The continued rapid cooling of the earth since WWII is in accord with the increase in global air pollution associated with industrialization, mechanization, urbanization and exploding population.”
    ————————————————
    June 30, 1989, Associated Press U.N. OFFICIAL PREDICTS DISASTER, SAYS GREENHOUSE EFFECT COULD WIPE SOME NATIONS OFF MAP–entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of “eco-refugees,” threatening political chaos, said Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program. He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect.
    ———————————————–
    Sept 19, 1989, St. Louis Post-Dispatch ”New York will probably be like Florida 15 years from now.”
    ————————————————
    December 5, 1989, Dallas Morning News “Some predictions for the next decade are not difficult to make…Americans may see the ’80s migration to the Sun Belt reverse as a global warming trend rekindles interest in cooler climates.
    ————————————————-
    1990 Michael Oppenheimer, The Environmental Defense Fund, “(By) 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots…”(By 1996) The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers…The Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”
    ———————————————-
    April 18, 1990, Denver Post “Giant sand dunes may turn Plains to desert–huge sand dunes extending east from Colorado’s Front Range may be on the verge of breaking through the thin topsoil, transforming America’s rolling High Plains into a desert, new research suggests. The giant sand dunes discovered by NASA satellite photos are expected to re-emerge over the next 20 t0 50 years, depending on how fast average temperatures rise from the suspected ‘greenhouse effect’ scientists believe”
    ————————————————-
    1991 Edward Goldsmith, 5000 Days to Save the Planet ”By 2000, British and American oil will have diminished to a trickle….Ozone depletion and global warming threaten food shortages, but the wealthy North will enjoy a temporary reprieve by buying up the produce of the South. Unrest among the hungry and the ensuing political instability, will be contained by the North’s greater military might. A bleak future indeed, but an inevitable one unless we change the way we live….At present rates of exploitation there may be no rainforest left in 10 years. If measures are not taken immediately, the greenhouse effect may be unstoppable in 12 to 15 years.”
    ————————————————
    April 22, 1990 ABC, The Miracle Planet “I think we’re in trouble. When you realize how little time we have left–we are now given not 10 years to save the rainforests, but in many cases five years. Madagascar will largely be gone in five years unless something happens. And nothing is happening.”
    ————————————————
    February 1993, Thomas E. Lovejoy, Smithsonian Institution “Most of the great environmental struggles will be either won or lost in the 1990s and by the next century it will be too late.”
    ————————————————
    November 7, 1997, BBC (A commentator) “It appears that we have a very good case for suggesting that the El Ninos are going to become more frequent, and they’re going to become more intense and in a few years, or a decade or so, we’ll go into a permanent El Nino. So instead of having cool water periods for a year or two, we’ll have El Nino upon El Nino, and that will become the norm. And you’ll have an El Nino, that instead of lasting 18 months, lasts 18 years.”
    ——————————————–
    July 26, 1999 The Birmingham Post ”Scientists are warning that some of the Himalayan glaciers could vanish within ten years because of global warming. A build-up of greenhouse gases is blamed for the meltdown, which could lead to drought and flooding in the region affecting millions of people.”

  13. #373

  14. #374
    Part 2 -- and I will begin highlighting some of the wild and absurd "scientific predictions" made by the likes of James Hansen. No don't forget, CO2 levels have increased considerably and year over year since these dire warnings were issued.

    ———————————————
    October 15, 1990 Carl Sagan ”The planet could face an ‘ecological and agricultural catastrophe’ by the next decade if global warming trends continue.”
    ———————————————–
    Sept 11, 1999, The Guardian “A report last week claimed that within a decade, the disease (malaria) will be common again on the Spanish coast. The effects of global warming are coming home to roost in the developed world.”
    ———————————————–
    March 29, 2001, CNN ”In ten years time, most of the low-lying atolls surrounding Tuvalu’s nine islands in the South Pacific Ocean will be submerged under water as global warming rises sea levels.” [Next year we'll know if this extremely unlikely prediction comes true.]
    ———————————————–
    1988 or 1989, Dr. James Hansen (In an interview with author Rob Reiss. Reiss asked how the greenhouse effect was likely to affect the neighborhood below Hansen’s office in NYC in the next 20 years). Hansen, looking out the window, answered: ”The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change….There will be more police cars….[since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” [I am thankful to WUWT for this account.]
    ———————————————-
    1969 Lubos Moti, Czech physicist ”It is now pretty clearly agreed that CO2 content [in the atmosphere] will rise 25% by 2000. This could increase the average temperature near the earth’s surface by 7 degrees fahrenheit. This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter.
    ———————————————-
    2005 Andrew Simms, policy director of the New Economics Foundation, “Scholars are predicting that 50 million people worldwide will be displaced by 2010 because of rising sea levels, desertification, dried up aquifers, weather-induced flooding and other serious environmental changes.”
    ——————————————-
    Oct 20, 2009, Gordon Brown UK Prime Minister (referring to the Copenhagen climate conference): ”World leaders have 50 days to save the Earth from irreversible global warming.”
    ——————————————-
    June 2008, Ted Alvarez, Backpacker Magazine Blogs, “you could potentially sail, kayak, or even swim to the North Pole by the end of the summer. Climate scientists say that the Arctic ice…is currently on track to melt sometime in 2008.” [Shortly after this prediction was made, a Russian icebreaker was trapped in the ice of the Northwest Passage for a week.]
    ———————————————–
    1992, Al Gore “Only an insignificant fraction of scientists deny the global warming crisis. The time for debate is over. The science is settled.”
    ————————————————
    May 31, 2006 Al Gore, on CBS Early Show “…the debate among the scientists is over. There is no more debate. We face a planetary emergency. There is no more scientific debate among serious people who’ve looked at the science…Well, I guess in some quarters, there’s still a debate over whether the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, or whether the Earth is flat instead of round.” [The "bibliography for climate skeptics (above) suggests that there are some "serious people" still willing to debate.]
    ————————————————–
    January 2000 Dr. Michael Oppenheimer of the Environmental Defense Fund commenting (in a NY Times interview) on the mild winters in New York City. ”But it does not take a scientist to size up the effects of snowless winters on the children too young to remember the record-setting blizzards of 1996. For them, the pleasures of sledding and snowball fights are as out-of-date as hoop-rolling, and the delight of a snow day off from school is unknown.”
    ————————————————–
    2008 Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Space Institute (NASA) on a visit to Britain, “The recent warm winters that Britain has experienced are a sign that the climate is changing.” [Two exceptionally cold winters followed. The 2009-10 winter may be the coldest experienced in the UK since 1683.]
    ——————————————-
    June 11, 1986 Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Space Institute (NASA) in testimony to Congress (according to the Milwaukee Journal) “Hansen predicted global temperatures should be nearly 2 degrees higher in 20 years, ‘which is about the warmest the earth has been in the last 100,000 years.’”
    ———————————————-
    June 8, 1972 Christian Science Monitor ”Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen says a general warming trend over the North Pole is melting the polar ice cap and may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2000.”
    ———————————————-
    May 15, 1989 Associated Press ”Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide [USA] two degrees by 2010.”

  15. #375
    Let's highlight NASA's James Hansen who should receive some sort of lifetime achievement award for being so wildly and consistently wrong in his climate predictions. You will be hearing a lot from Hansen since the warmist community has turned to him for "reasons" why the global temperature has not risen in 17 years. He will be in nearly all the articles you are getting ready to be pummeled with so it is a good idea to get to know this character who, with a straight face, says all the "warming is now probably trapped beneath the oceans". That's right, he and Gavin Schmidt (another heavily invested bell ringer) use the highly scientific terms "probably" and "likely".


    1988 or 1989, Dr. James Hansen (In an interview with author Rob Reiss. Reiss asked how the greenhouse effect was likely to affect the neighborhood below Hansen’s office in NYC in the next 20 years). Hansen, looking out the window, answered: ”The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change….There will be more police cars….[since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” [I am thankful to WUWT for this account.]

    Are we to hold these assholes to some sort standard...again, he and Lovelock and a host of other ringleaders look more like Sunday morning Armageddon peddlers.

  16. #376
    Do you think anyone is reading multiple postings that lengthy?
    When in doubt, rub one out -BiffTannen

  17. #377
    Quote Originally Posted by ONW View Post
    Do you think anyone is reading multiple postings that lengthy?
    Not out here amidst this slovenly band of so-called college boys. Learning something about what they pontificate on just ain't in the cards.

    But if you take the time to read these wildly off-base predictions by the leaders of the warm movement then you won't be such a God Damn Sap the next time you hear some wild eyed bullshit such as what shot out of John Kerry's mouth just yesterday.

  18. #378
    Oh man, sweet 1970s climate models.

  19. #379
    Is 2005 better there, double aught...

    2005 Andrew Simms, policy director of the New Economics Foundation, “Scholars are predicting that 50 million people worldwide will be displaced by 2010 because of rising sea levels, desertification, dried up aquifers, weather-induced flooding and other serious environmental changes.”

    I'll take it one at a time for the slower crew.

  20. #380
    2008 Dr. James Hansen of the Goddard Space Institute (NASA) on a visit to Britain, “The recent warm winters that Britain has experienced are a sign that the climate is changing.” [Two exceptionally cold winters followed. The 2009-10 winter may be the coldest experienced in the UK since 1683.]

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •