UN Chief Misled Sydney Audience
Posted by Charlotte Ramotswe, November 8th, 2008 - under News, Opinion.
Tags: Climate & Climate Change
LAST month, a regular reader of this blog, Michael Duffy, witnessed something shocking:
“Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was giving a talk at the University of NSW [in Sydney, Australia]. The talk was accompanied by a slide presentation, and the most important graph showed average global temperatures. For the past decade it represented temperatures climbing sharply.
As this was shown on the screen, Pachauri told his large audience: “We’re at a stage where warming is taking place at a much faster rate [than before]“.
Now, this is completely wrong. For most of the past seven years, those temperatures have actually been on a plateau. For the past year, there’s been a sharp cooling. These are facts, not opinion: the major sources of these figures, such as the Hadley Centre in Britain, agree on what has happened, and you can check for yourself by going to their websites. Sure, interpretations of the significance of this halt in global warming vary greatly, but the facts are clear.
So it’s disturbing that Rajendra Pachauri’s presentation was so erroneous, and would have misled everyone in the audience unaware of the real situation. This was particularly so because he was giving the talk on the occasion of receiving an honorary science degree from the university.”
Read more here.
Michael Duffy is a writer and author who used to play in rock bands. He now hosts ‘Counterpoint’ on Australia’s ABC Radio National every Monday afternoon which can be heard worldwide on the internet.
Spangles,
Luke really has an obsession with me, don’t you thin? I am such a danger to the AGW Guild of which Luke is part?
But I do miss the SJT’s soliloqys.
Luke: “competitive market”
Tautology.
Uttered by beings smaller than dwarfs.
The actual area under discussion is a good example of tectonics. The fact that all you’ve been able to come up with is looking a Wiki ….ooooo…. well says it all doesn’t it.
Louis I don’t have an obsession with you – I just think you’re a boring old fart.
Luke,
What area of discussion – what on earth are you blathering about.
All you have done so far is to throw rotten tomatoes and eggs to the stage, not having a clue about the issues you seem to be offended by.
Reminds me of the movie of the Adventures of the Baron Munschausen – but I can’t make up my mind which idiot character you should play.
“PROF. ANN HENDERSON-SELLERS, MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY: A lot of people like myself, and I believe many, many scientists now, who are frantically, hysterically worried.”
About this time every year all cuckoos get frantically, hysterically worried in case they can’t get some sucker to hatch their eggs for them.
I suspect Prof. Ann of similar intent.
Alas Louis I’ve been quoting science – as usual you’ve been gibbering about leftists.
zzzzzzzz ….
Spanglers – of course you guys were lauding Prof Ann just the other day. It seems Ann is a sceptic – she thinks the IPCC have watered things down.
Luke; PETM;
http://www.junkscience.com/images/paleocarbon.gif
The CO2 component of the graph is from Berner’s Geocarb 111 model, the temperature from Scotese’s modelling; note the PETM temperature of a tad under 22C, about 9C higher than today’s GMST, if you believe such things.
Arctic ice;
http:www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png (// excluded)
Area is increasing as well; the ice is now just a fraction under the 1979-2008 average. How can this be with AGW and various predictions made by the usual alarmists? While you are throwing the usual GCM papers, Gillett for gawd’s sake, I’ll just go on throwing empirical evidence.
Luke loses again.
Luke, jump. Jump now.
You know the ship of AGW is sinking. Its only a matter of time, now. You’re not so stupid that you don’t know. Stop trying to defend the indefensible, you know its all over. Jump now.
You know damn well that soon, very soon, thousands of rats will be jumping. Thousands are going to drown in the crush. Jump now, before it’s too late. Jump.
We’re going to have to convert thousanda of bulldozers to picks & shovels, so we can employ the tens of thousands discredited researchers, with no chance of employment, except on the roads. Jump.
If you go soon enough there may be some chance of rehabilitation, so jump, jump now.
Nathan P. Gillett1, Dáithí A. Stone2,3, Peter A. Stott4, Toru Nozawa5, Alexey Yu. Karpechko1, Gabriele C. Hegerl6, Michael F. Wehner7 & Philip D. Jones1
So this is from East Anglia, a crappy little pseudo-tech that is far outside the Times HES top 200. Just the sort of place where green/left evangelicals will be welcome because they attract rivers of funds from second raters like the BoM and then make UEA seem important. This is sad. So what do you think the reviewing standards were like for this particular on-line journal Luke? And it’s just another crappy software model that says: our results are different to observed reality so of course you must believe us! Yoohoo! Then again (note to self) must join this bandwagon if I want to get funded… but do I really want to be a prostitute? Challenging times..
What a bunch of hard tossing increasingly desperate dishonest denialists.
This is the sea ice story http://nsidc.org/news/images/20081002_Figure2.png
This is the 30 YEAR trend story – http://nsidc.org/news/press/20081002_seaice_pressrelease.html
– you’d have to be kidding guys …
Cohenite – a quick PETM primer
During the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM) (1), the sea surface temperature rose by 5°C in the tropics (2) and more than 6°C in the Arctic (3), in conjunction with ocean acidification (4) and the extinction of 30 to 50% of deep-sea benthic formaminiferal species (5). The initiation of the PETM is marked by an abrupt decrease in the {delta}13C proportion of marine and terrestrial sedimentary carbon (1, 6), which is consistent with the rapid addition of >1500 gigatons of 13C-depleted carbon, in the form of carbon dioxide and/or methane, into the hydrosphere and atmosphere (7). The PETM is thought to have lasted only 210,000 to 220,000 years, with most of the decrease in {delta}13C occurring over a 20,000-year period at the beginning of the event (8).
But of course the serious news is the 1800 year record of the Asian monsoon that suddenly changes sign in the 1960s after running like a little heartbeat.
A Test of Climate, Sun, and Culture
Relationships from an 1810-Year
Chinese Cave Record
Pingzhong Zhang,1 Hai Cheng,2* R. Lawrence Edwards,2 Fahu Chen,1 Yongjin Wang,3
Xunlin Yang,1 Jian Liu,4 Ming Tan,5 Xianfeng Wang,2 Jinghua Liu,1 Chunlei An,1 Zhibo Dai,1
Jing Zhou,1 Dezhong Zhang,1 Jihong Jia,1 Liya Jin,1 Kathleen R. Johnson6
A record from Wanxiang Cave, China, characterizes Asian Monsoon (AM) history over the past 1810
years. The summer monsoon correlates with solar variability, Northern Hemisphere and Chinese
temperature, Alpine glacial retreat, and Chinese cultural changes. It was generally strong during
Europe’s Medieval Warm Period and weak during Europe’s Little Ice Age, as well as during the final
decades of the Tang, Yuan, and Ming Dynasties, all times that were characterized by popular
unrest. It was strong during the first several decades of the Northern Song Dynasty, a period of
increased rice cultivation and dramatic population increase. The sign of the correlation between
the AM and temperature switches around 1960, suggesting that anthropogenic forcing superseded
natural forcing as the major driver of AM changes in the late 20th century.
What was that ? Jaw drop !!
Add this to the changes in the southern hemisphere to the sub-tropical ridge and southern annular mode described in the recent leading review of rainfall variability in southern Australia – http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/116330641/abstract – then the nutty squirrels that inhabit this forum might start wising up.
I think you meant to post this chart Luke – or maybe you didn’t.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Every northern fall we expect sea ice to return to near the long term average extent. This is because the long-term average is dropping with global warming and because it still remains dark and cold through fall so that the entire Arctic ocean refreezes after the summer melt. BUT if you look at the ice thickness you see the signature of global warming in cm’s thick new ice replacing what was once metres thick multi-year ice – in otherwords the ice volume is falling rapidly. This pattern of record low ice in summer followed by slightly below normal ice extent in fall/winter will continue for a few decades yet, BUT with the freeze up tending later and later and later.
The seasonal refreeze of the Arctic after very low summer ice is exactly to be expected and is a consequence of the enhanced greenhouse effect interacting with the seasonal cycle.
>The talk was accompanied by a slide presentation, and the most important graph showed average global temperatures. For the past decade it represented temperatures climbing sharply.
and
>We’re at a stage where warming is taking place at a much faster rate [than before]“.
The graph of global temperatures can be seen at the 16.30 minute mark at the video record of the presentation at http://www.unsw.edu.au/news/pad/wallacewurth.html . The graph clearly supports the view of a rapidly warming globe.
This is example of mixing up weather noise and interannual variability with decadal time scale global warming. 1998 was hot because it followed the strongest El Nino of the 20th century. Early 2008 was almost cool because it followed a La Nina, record snow storms across Eurasia and a cool sun.
In recent months surface temperatures have rebounded strongly and are running close to record highs.
I’m happy to talk on Counter Point to clear up any confusion.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/Chip-arctic_sea_ice_loss.pdf
Here is a different explanation by a climate scientist using peer reviewed material.
Of course the people doing the publishing would not be to the liking of the government funded alarmist brigade, who make habit of only telling half the story.
Malcolm
you’re a riot
It’s the sceptics who tell half the story – in fact it’s THE distinguishing feature
And I split my sides “using peer reviewed material” – mate so does the cat – it’s just more fact laundering from a sceptic septic think tank worried shitless about the Arctic. And in the funny fonts they so love. Makes all the difference.
But I love it – Cohenite can use this one every day “using peer reviewed material”. hehehehehe
(be fun to see the money trail for the SPPI mob too)
It is beyond doubt that Arctic ice, in terms of extent and area, is almost back to 1979-2008 averages; the ice thickness, a proxy for ice age, is improving as a cursory glance, from someone with average intelligence and an open mind, at Cryosphere would show; the Arctic ice does have regional climate factors but has been subject to the general and natural warming over the last 30 odd years consistent with the +vePDO prevailing over this period; next year will be revealing and will be one final test of AGW; if Arctic ice increases next year by all 3 indices then AGW is dead(er).
It still astounds me that people like David can utter such specious clap-trap about temperature: “We’re at a stage where warming is taking place at a much faster rate [than before].” This is culpable and should be legally actionable; it is simply and profoundly wrong. All temperature indices show declining temperatures since 1998, except GISS, and even GISS only shows a temeprature increase over the 20thC of 0.6C; based on IPCC forcings and climate sensitivity estimates, this increase should have been 1.3C; arguably the 0,6C is only a product of +ve PDO effects. Simply terrible.
Luke Bsc Hons –you are SO predictable, and so completely obsessed with being the ever lasting vexatious bloggerant there would have to be be a logical reason.
–as for money trails well yes –I would love to know that about lot of people.!
As for who tells half the story — well cant and hypocrisy seem to be the norm with the alarmists and their adoring acoloytes.
Only they are so blinded by their faith that they fail to read — but with you it is has become a trade mark.
Thanks Malcolm. Agreed.
Pachauri is just a typical con artist for a religio/political organisation with little regard for the truth and operating with neither shame nor apology. The UN’s IPCC is a money-maker for India and a lever with which to obtain western technology by pointing to our excessive consumption by warning of coming doom unless we mend our sinful ways.
What is truly disturbing in this whole milieu of worship where finagling is endemic and a necessary requirement, is how could UNSW give this shonk an Honorary Science Degree?
Comment from Bob Carter on the UN Chief and his methods here: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=9tOFoFx7S6M .
Other parts of this series can be found at the community page here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/category/community/
You’d have to say the Bob is very good. Very very good.
But not quite good enough to let the substitute MWP graph slip in. Yes ,,,,,
You’d have to wonder if anyone truly objective is left….
Keiran,
Because the Whigs control government, the universities, and the education system.
Luke and others may well insist it is a scientific issue, it isn’t – its a political issue using climate science as the means to bludgeon us, albeit in a most subtle way by frightening the BJ’s out of us, into behaving how they want us to.
Luke: “But not quite good enough to let the substitute MWP graph slip in. Yes ,,,,,”
A classic non-sequitur – I am not sure whether you or SJT should get top prize for this category.
Let’s keep it simple:
1. Does the World’s climate change – YES
2. Did the World warm for approx 30 years upto 2000 – YES
3. Has World temperature flatlined/dropped since 2000 – YES
4. Is there any empirical evidence that CO2 has caused or greatly exacerbated past or the more recent warming – NO
5. Do we know what other factors can cause climate change – YES
6. Is CO2 beneficial to plant life and crops – YES
7. Other than the Sun what has the largest influence on our climate – The Oceans and water vapour
8. Have the computer models accurately predicted climate change over the last 10 years – NO
9. Do we know enough about the climate – a chaotic, non linear system – to predict climate change with any accuracy – NO
10. Will there be another Ice Age – YES
3 – not if you include the Arctic
4 – wrong
6 – also maybe harmful – increases frost sensitivity (await stupid rebuttal comment), and useless without adequate water, may also preference woody weeds over grasses
7 – conditional – depends – possibly irrelevant
9 – poorly constructed, fundamentally wrong
10 – red herring – not for 10,000s of years
P.S. Louis – substituting one bogus graph in critique of another is pure sophistry. Your tool in trade.
luke; Jennifer sent me the Rayner paper on ’stilling’; Steve Short has a critique of it at 74 here;
http://landshape.org/enm/greenhouse-heat-engine-2/#comments
Any comments?
Add that to A Test of Climate, Sun, and Culture Relationships from an 1810-Year Chinese Cave Record paper above and the review on SE Aust rainfall – same comment then you start to develop an emerging picture of major changes in atmospheric circulation – the cave data shows this to be a “one-off”. None of this cinches AGW but you’d have to be quite suspicious at this point of a theme that just keeps repeating.
Why does this matter – water resources !!! Really much more important than temperature.
As for Short – well ….. he’s a smart guy eh.
You might also look up “An assessment of relationships between the Australian subtropical ridge, rainfall variability, and high-latitude circulation patterns” (2008)
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119879251/abstract
The real work continues regardless of the political debate….
Luke:
“Sophism can mean two very different things: In the modern definition, a sophism is a confusing or illogical argument used for deceiving someone.”
Actually your tool in trade.