Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Paul

Scepticism Of Man Made Climate Change

Recommended Posts

here is a link to a new paper on planetery influence on solar cycles

 

http://www.landscheidt.info/?q=node/325

 

Given that WUWT won't review it must be good and the abstract might even be read by those over the road

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't I post as much on the relevant thread?

 So you agree then that Russia could well believe we are going to suffer significant cooling rather than warming and are taking steps to obtain land that they might use for displaced agriculture or population!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoops wrong thread.

Edited by knocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polar Bears threaten by the thickness of ice(not 4foot thickness as some insist)

  • [*]
Alaskan Polar Bears Threatened…By Too Much Spring Ice

'16 feet thick ice is threatening the survival of polar bears in the Southern Beaufort Sea region along Alaska’s Arctic coast, according to Dr. Susan J. Crockford, an evolutionary biologist'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me guess before I click the link. It;s an article by David Rose.

 

Bingo. I've won another mars bar/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to know that what has been constantly said on this thread IPPC is just another way force as to make us feel good about us paying more money for our energy bills via the great green taxation. Pity though the poor governments across the world haven"t found a way for green energy to make any money!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me guess before I click the link. It;s an article by David Rose.

 

Bingo. I've won another mars bar/

 

More about Robert Stavins me thinks. Have you read it ? Do you think he made it up ?

 

Global warming is a big industry would make the Mafia look small

 

--------------------------------------------

 

A top US academic has dramatically revealed how government officials forced him to change a hugely influential scientific report on climate change to suit their own interests. 

Harvard professor Robert Stavins electrified the worldwide debate on climate change on Friday by sensationally publishing a letter online in which he spelled out the astonishing interference.

He said the officials, representing ‘all the main countries and regions of the world’ insisted on the changes in a late-night meeting at a Berlin conference centre two weeks ago.

Three quarters of the original version of the document ended up being deleted.

Prof Stavins claimed the intervention amounted to a serious ‘conflict of interest’ between scientists and governments. His revelation is significant because it is rare for climate change experts to publicly question the process behind the compilation of reports on the subject

--------------- 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

More about Robert Stavins me thinks. Have you read it ? Do you think he made it up ?

 

Global warming is a big industry would make the Mafia look small

 

--------------------------------------------

 

A top US academic has dramatically revealed how government officials forced him to change a hugely influential scientific report on climate change to suit their own interests. 

Harvard professor Robert Stavins electrified the worldwide debate on climate change on Friday by sensationally publishing a letter online in which he spelled out the astonishing interference.

He said the officials, representing ‘all the main countries and regions of the world’ insisted on the changes in a late-night meeting at a Berlin conference centre two weeks ago.

Three quarters of the original version of the document ended up being deleted.

Prof Stavins claimed the intervention amounted to a serious ‘conflict of interest’ between scientists and governments. His revelation is significant because it is rare for climate change experts to publicly question the process behind the compilation of reports on the subject

--------------- 

 

Extract from that http://www.robertstavinsblog.org/2014/04/25/is-the-ipcc-government-approval-process-broken-2/

Of interest is this paragraph:

Over the course of the two hours of the contact group deliberations, it became clear that the only way the assembled government representatives would approve text for SPM.5.2 was essentially to remove all “controversial†text (that is, text that was uncomfortable for any one individual government), which meant deleting almost 75% of the text, including nearly all explications and examples under the bolded headings. In more than one instance, specific examples or sentences were removed at the will of only one or two countries, because under IPCC rules, the dissent of one country is sufficient to grind the entire approval process to a halt unless and until that country can be appeased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to know that what has been constantly said on this thread IPPC is just another way force as to make us feel good about us paying more money for our energy bills via the great green taxation. Pity though the poor governments across the world haven"t found a way for green energy to make any money!

http://t.co/sYislGTKE6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is a problem that much of the funding is dependent on wide spread immediate catastrophic change.

 

There was wide spread reporting of potentially 6c global temp rise by 2100 as recently as 2009

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/world-on-course-for-catastrophic-6deg-rise-reveal-scientists-1822396.html

 

Now common consensus is down to around 2c global temp rise by 2100 with the usual rhetoric 

 

UN’s 2C limit for global warming is way too high and would threaten major dislocations for civilization say a group of prominent scientists - 

 

http://www.rtcc.org/2013/12/03/james-hansen-2-c-temperature-rise-would-be-disastrous/

 

 

Imagine if we  saw 0.1c to 0.3c rise , the spin gets harder to push through and funding starts to get cut

 

So ANY event is now reported as 'man-made' with a small follow through 'mumble' it maybe just weather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, and I'm paraphrasing,

 

(i) if the slow down is natural and ...

(ii) CO2 is the major climate forcing

 

How is is that natural forcings are poweful enough to override an exponential rise in CO2?

 

I realise that, in debates such as these, 2+2<>4, but 2+2=10?

 

(That'll be the feedbacks and feedforwards, then, which are the most uncertain parts of climate science)

Edited by Sparkicle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the excuse for last years extremely late one again?We are always being lectured about how cold records are now so difficult to break..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loads of 'projections' of what could happen. People are getting bit bored of it. Look at what could / may happen in Alaska in 2100 ie less frozen waste land. 

 

 

http://www.vox.com/2014/5/6/5686770/nine-maps-that-show-how-climate-change-is-already-affecting-the-us

Edited by stewfox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greenpeace Co-Founder: No Evidence of Man-Made Global Warming

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/greenpeace-co-founder-no-evidence-of-man-made-global-warming/

 

 

Found it  'interesting' and before the other camp say he is not a scientist , would you have seen that 10/20 yrs ago ?

Edited by stewfox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moral of the story is that environmentalists are basically trolls and should be ignored.Never a truer word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...