74
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 12:30 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
I know it because that is pretty much the consensus of the 400 disputing AGW as a done deal. And from several articles such as this--I doubt anyone can find anything credible with which to dispute them:

Quote:
. . . .the so-called consensus of hundreds of scientists on the IPCC report is much worse than that. An analysis released in September 2007 on the IPCC scientific review process by Australian climate data analyst John McLean, revealed that the UN IPCC peer-review process is "an illusion." Only a few of the “hundreds” are actually involved in the UN’s peer-review process. Says McLean, “The IPCC leads us to believe that this statement is very much supported by the majority of reviewers. The reality is that there is surprisingly little explicit support for this key notion. Among the 23 independent reviewers just 4 explicitly endorsed the chapter with its hypothesis, and one other endorsed only a specific section.”

Putting this into perspective, at most 52 scientists wrote the IPPC’s report, of which only 4 or 5 endorsed its highly politicized findings. Yet, the IPCC repeatedly gives the impression that hundreds, if not thousands of scientists endorse their conclusions. This is completely false. While many other scientists do endorse it, it is certainly not a consensus. Compared to this, every one of the 23 NIPCC’s scientists and economists who authored the report released at the conference endorsed it. Likewise, most, if not all, the 100 scientists at the conference endorsed the NIPCC’s conclusions.

No one should be surprised that the mainstream press got it completely wrong " again. After all, if they wrote that the polar bear, which is being considered for listing as an endangered species, is experiencing record high populations and is in fact not in danger from global warming, the reporters would suffer the scorn of their environmentalist friends and the possible wrath of their editors. If they wrote that maybe, just maybe all these scientists at the March Climate Change meeting in New York were right, it would shatter the use of global warming as a justification for global governance, as former French President, Jacque Chirac proclaimed to the world in 2000 during the Framework Convention on Climate Change’s COP 6 meeting. “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance…to organise our collective sovereignty over this planet.”
http://www.newswithviews.com/Coffman/mike11.htm
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 01:02 pm
@Foxfyre,
I really would like to have some more information about this "Australian climate data analyst John McLean" who quoted so often on conservative websites.
McLean's own websites are Swiss located, he himself says that he's a member of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (though not named there).

Otherwise, Foxfyre, your argumentation is of course very convincing ...

And I must admit that I usually support minority opinions as well as minorities, too.
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 03:36 pm
@Foxfyre,
By the way, I've started a new thread:
OBAMA VERSUS MCCAIN: ARGUMENTS FOR WHO IS BETTER FOR MOST AMERICANS
Discussion by ican711nm on 09/28/08 4:06 PM.

I'd be pleased if you--as well as others here--were to join me in this discussion.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 07:59 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Is this an indication that your opinion has shifted in regard to global warming, Walter?

Needless to say, I believe the hiccup in the economy, and the accompanying wringing of the hands if not outright panic, clearly shows the global warming frenzy to be much ado about virtually nothing, as compared to real problems.

Let us hope the hiccup does not turn into a choking scenario.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 11:49 pm
@okie,
No, okie, my opinion hasn't changed.

And because the US capitalism got a hiccup, problems still are problems.

But I truly believe that this is one of your, our problems: people are nowadays just and only focused on one thing, others are disregarded, forgotten, if a new problem is on the neighbourhood radar. We don't use wide range radar anymore, prevention is a foreign word, responsibility for next generations a fairy tale.
Devil-may-care.
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Sep, 2008 03:56 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Indeed...but that's the essence of laissez faire free market capitalism. Get what you can now.

I can think of better ways of organising an economy...but I went along with capitalism because

a) it was regulated
b) it was a fantastic generator of wealth...even if that wealth was distributed hopelessly unevenly

but now it appears it wasnt regulated, and even I underestimated the greed of the super rich.

Creating wealth and burning oil are related. Interesting the price of oil is falling as we head into recession/slump. But maybe its good news for the climate because CO2 emissions will fall too.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Sep, 2008 10:33 am
Quote:
Richard Branson's space tourism company, Virgin Galactic, is to use its space planes to gather scientific data on climate change from the highest reaches of the atmosphere under a new collaboration with an American government laboratory.

Instruments and sensors will be added to the company's high altitude plane, White Knight Two, and the smaller rocket-propelled SpaceShipTwo, as part of a climate change research project planned by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Colorado.

The researchers will use Virgin Galactic test flights, and subsequent commercial launches, to collect air samples from high up in the atmosphere, which will be analysed for greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and other constituents.

Source
miniTAX
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Oct, 2008 11:53 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
Richard Branson's space tourism company, Virgin Galactic, is to use its space planes to gather scientific data on climate change


Tourism to help understand climate change ???
I presume it's called stratospheric (very high) greenwashing.

It's rather happy news : that proves those hypocrites self-proclaimed climate protectors don't believe one second in the consensus crap they are marketing.

BTW, hi all. Just trolling Wink

Oh, this story about Branson and his eco-friends may interest you Walter
http://deceiver.com/2008/06/25/google-to-change-motto-from-dont-be-evil-to-make-it-look-like-an-accident/
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Oct, 2008 12:15 pm
@miniTAX,
miniTAX wrote:

Tourism to help understand climate change ???
I presume it's called stratospheric (very high) greenwashing.


Well, if YOU call the project planned by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration a tourism offer, you certainly didn't read more than a couple of words from my quote .... nor the linked article.


0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Oct, 2008 12:18 pm
@miniTAX,
miniTAX wrote:

Oh, this story about Branson and his eco-friends may interest you Walter


Well, there are a lot of houses (especially in the US) not on google.earth - just look at one of the google hacker sites ...
(And a couple of German towns and cities will stay dark in google-street-view as well: they just don't allow them to video their streets ...)
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 1 Oct, 2008 02:40 pm
@okie,
Magnitude of Fanny&Freddy problem shows
Quote:
the global warming frenzy to be much ado about virtually nothing, as compared to real problems.


TREND IN AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES - CELSIUS
Quote:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
(months: jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sept oct nove dec average)
2003 0.527 0.438 0.422 0.414 0.435 0.439 0.453 0.523 0.518 0.565 0.428 0.519 0.473
...
2004 0.505 0.571 0.510 0.495 0.324 0.347 0.371 0.419 0.446 0.477 0.526 0.376 0.447
...
2005 0.463 0.376 0.493 0.536 0.480 0.512 0.532 0.503 0.507 0.513 0.494 0.371 0.482
...
2006 0.296 0.443 0.385 0.357 0.338 0.443 0.434 0.488 0.417 0.481 0.441 0.536 0.422
...
2007 0.632 0.520 0.441 0.472 0.374 0.375 0.406 0.370 0.412 0.368 0.268 0.213 0.404
...
2008 0.050 0.189 0.446 0.267 0.278 0.312 0.412 0.387 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.293*
...


*average for jan thru aug.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Oct, 2008 12:32 pm
@Steve 41oo,
Steve - you may wish to look up "Manias, Panics, and Crashes" by an old teacher of mine, long dead. His vivid description of the South Sea Bubble (in which Isaac Newton lost 20,000 pounds of his own money, an enorm0us sum at the time) is priceless. The tulip craze in Holland is another classic. Crises like these date back to since records have been kept.

Back to the topic, one innocent victim of the global "warming" myth - who must have been reading this thread - has just been rescued from icy waters off Massachusetts:

Quote:
The plan is to lure the manatee to shore with lettuce, envelop it in a net, and lift the 600- to 800-pound beast out of the water with a crane. They hope to load it into a cargo plane, where veterinarians will shower the manatee with water until it arrives in Orlando.

High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Oct, 2008 12:47 pm
@High Seas,
.... and while we're dealing with this CO2 nonsense, fauna and flora are getting poisoned all over the planet:

Quote:
whales retained even more toxins than polar bears, which had been believed to be the region's most toxic animals.

The finding raises the question: How did one of the planet's most untrammeled corners become a repository for these toxins?

"Most of these chemicals are not produced or widely used in the Arctic," WWF's Walker said. "But air and ocean currents are going [predominately] northward.....

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/12/1213_051213_killer_whales.html
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Oct, 2008 04:27 pm
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

As of December 20, 2007, over 400 prominent scientists--not a minority of those scientists who have published their views on global warming--from more than two dozen countries have voiced significant objections to major aspects of the alleged UN IPCC "consensus" on man-made global warming.

THE DISSENTS OF THE SCIENTIFIC DISSENTERS

Quote:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport#report

210
Indur M Goklany, Ph.D, who has represented the United States at the International Panel on Climate Change and in the negotiations leading to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, also scrutinized the UN's IPCC Summary for Policymakers (SPM) released in 2007. "Once one gets past the opaque verbiage of the SPM, it is clear that most of the negative impacts listed in the SPM are overstated, while the positive impacts are understated," Goklany noted in an April 9, 2007 critique. (LINK) Goklany managed the US Environmental Protection Agency's fledgling emissions-trading program in the 1980s. "These [IPCC] studies estimate impacts for 2085 using technologies from the 1990s or earlier. This is like estimating today's food production and levels of hunger using technologies from the 1910s! You are bound to underestimate food production and overestimate hunger. In developing countries prevalence of chronic hunger declined from 37% to 17% between 1970 and 2001, despite an 83% increase in population, in substantial part because of new technologies," Goklany added. "Similarly, human health impacts are often estimated assuming that adaptive capacities are fixed as of the start date of the analysis. Under such a methodology the mortality and morbidity rates from water related diseases in the U.S., for example, would be the same in 2000 as in 1900. But in fact, these rates have declined by 99% or more during the 20th century for disease such as typhoid, paratyphoid, dysentery, malaria, etc.," Goklany noted.

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Oct, 2008 03:26 pm
SINCE 2005 AS THE DENSITY OF CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE HAS INCREASED, THE AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE HAS DECREASED

Of the four candidates--Obama, Biden, McCain, Paylin--only Paylin understands that CO2 density in the atmosphere has little if any effect on global warming.

INCREASES IN DENSITY OF CARBON DIOXIDE (CO2) IN THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE SINCE 2005.
Quote:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
YEAR ..... MONTH ........ ATMOSPHERIC CO2 PPM
2003 ........... 9 ............. 376.44
2004 ........... 9 ............. 377.35
2005 ........... 9 ............. 379.97
2006 ........... 9 ............. 382.07
2007 ........... 9 ............. 384.00
2008 ........... 9 ............. 386.36

Net INcrease in CO2 2005 to 2008 = 386.36 - 379.97 = 6.39 ppm

DECREASES IN AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURES SINCE 2005
Quote:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
year, jan, feb, mar, apr, may, jun, jul, aug, sep, oct, nov, dec, average
2003 0.527 0.438 0.422 0.414 0.435 0.439 0.453 0.523 0.518 0.565 0.428 0.519 0.473
2004 0.505 0.571 0.510 0.495 0.324 0.347 0.371 0.419 0.446 0.477 0.526 0.376 0.447
2005 0.463 0.376 0.493 0.536 0.480 0.512 0.532 0.503 0.507 0.513 0.494 0.371 0.482
2006 0.296 0.443 0.385 0.357 0.338 0.443 0.434 0.488 0.417 0.481 0.441 0.536 0.422
2007 0.632 0.520 0.441 0.472 0.374 0.375 0.406 0.370 0.412 0.368 0.268 0.213 0.404
2008 0.050 0.189 0.446 0.267 0.278 0.312 0.412 0.387 0.376 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.301*
*average of global temperature anomalies jan thru sep

Net DEcrease in Average Global Temperature Anomalies 2005 to 2008 = 0.482 - 0.301 = 0.181 Celsius
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Nov, 2008 04:05 pm
The association between climate change and the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events is now well established. General circulation models of climate change predict that heatwaves will become more frequent and intense, especially in the higher latitudes, affecting large metropolitan areas that are not well adapted to them. Exposure to extreme heat is already a significant public health problem and the primary cause of weather-related mortality in the U.S. This article reviews major epidemiologic risk factors associated with mortality from extreme heat exposure and discusses future drivers of heat-related mortality, including a warming climate, the urban heat island effect, and an aging population. In addition, it considers critical areas of an effective public health response including heat response plans, the use of remote sensing and GIS methodologies, and the importance of effective communications strategies.

American Journal of Preventive Medicine: Abstract: Climate Change and Extreme Heat Events

Full paper
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 11:42 am
@Walter Hinteler,
You know, I have often thought about growing up in the warm Southwest in the 1940s and 50s. . . without air conditioning. Cars had 4/60 air conditioning--four windows down and 60 mph. Our schools were not air conditioned but we went to school just the same in 80 and 90 degree heat. Occasionally at night it would be so hot that we would drag our beds outside to sleep.

People lived in cities in those days too.

I wonder why it is so much more a problem now WITH air conditioning than it was back then when we didn't have such a thing?
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 07:27 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
The association between climate change and the frequency and intensity of extreme heat events is now well established.

That is a statement so obviously true that it almost qualifies as a truism..
When the climate consists of an extreme heating trend, of course the "frequency and intensity of extreme heat events" occurs. Likewise, When the climate consists of an extreme cooling trend, of course the "frequency and intensity of extreme cold events occurs.

Quote:
General circulation models of climate change predict that heatwaves will become more frequent and intense, especially in the higher latitudes, affecting large metropolitan areas that are not well adapted to them.

None of these models has been scientifically verified to be valid predictors of future weather. Yes, there is an alleged consensus of scientists who believe these models are valid. Yes, there is also an alleged consensus of scientists who believe these models are invalid.

There was a consensus that the earth was flat until it was demonstrated to be spherical. There was a consensus that the earth was the center of the universe until it was demonstrated that the earth orbited the sun, and the sun along with other stars orbited around the center of our galaxy. There was subsequently a consensus that our galaxy was the center of the universe until it was demonstrated that our galaxy revolves around other galaxies which together revolve around no one knows what.

So far it has been demonstrated that the earth cools and heats even while the density of CO2 in the atmosphere increases. The cyclic varyng of sun spot density is currently hypothesized to be the principal cause of the varying of the earth's average global temperature.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Nov, 2008 07:34 pm
@ican711nm,
One would almost think in your world there isn't an 11 year sun cycle.

Amazing isn't it how the earth's temperature decreases when the sun goes from its high to its low in that cycle? Don't worry ican, the earth is warming up as the sun puts out more energy.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 12:41 am
Paradise almost lost: Maldives seek to buy new homeland

Quote:
The Maldives will begin to divert a portion of the country's billion-dollar annual tourist revenue into buying a new homeland - as an insurance policy against climate change that threatens to turn the 300,000 islanders into environmental refugees, the country's first democratically elected president has told the Guardian. ...

He said Sri Lanka and India were targets because they had similar cultures, cuisines and climates. Australia was also being considered because of the amount of unoccupied land available.

"We do not want to leave the Maldives, but we also do not want to be climate refugees living in tents for decades," he said.

Environmentalists say the issue raises the question of what rights citizens have if their homeland no longer exists. "It's an unprecedented wake-up call," said Tom Picken, head of international climate change at Friends of the Earth. "The Maldives is left to fend for itself. It is a victim of climate change caused by rich countries."

Nasheed said he intended to create a "sovereign wealth fund" from the dollars generated by "importing tourists", in the way that Arab states have done by "exporting oil". "Kuwait might invest in companies; we will invest in land."
[...]

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 01/28/2022 at 10:53:02