a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment
(14) (1) (2) (6) (116) (10) (3) (1) (15) (2) (1936) (1) (2) (5) (7) (4) (9) (104) (9) (483) (1) (4) (15) (3) (1) (8) (1) (1)Scientist Steve Schneider Flips Fears
On the TV show In Search Of…The Coming Ice Age, Steven Schneider wonders whether mankind should intervene in staving off a coming ice age. Watch the old footage on YouTube here. (24)
Australian Liberals Oppose Carbon Trading
Australian Opposition Leader (Malcolm Turnbull) will be forced to stare down more than two-thirds of the Liberal back bench if he proceeds with his plan to negotiate with the government over amendments to the emissions trading scheme before December’s Copenhagen climate change conference. Read more here. (2)
Not Evil Just Wrong
Buy the DVD by clicking on the flashing icon above. (1)
Climate Change Summit in New York
In New York… Chinese leader Hu Jintao … U.S. President Barack Obama more or less shuffled climate control policy off into the great dreamscape of unattainable plans and long range objectives. Like equality for all and peace in our time … Terence Corcoran, Financial Post (1)
Minerals Industry Now Complaining
THE [Australian] minerals industry has demanded [the Prime Minister] Kevin Rudd overhaul his proposed emissions trading system or risk smashing Australian jobs and the nation’s industrial competitiveness. Read more here. (1)
Disclaimer: The inclusion of a blog or website in this list should not be taken as an endorsement of its contents by me.
Posted by jennifer, May 6th, 2009 - under Opinion.
Tags: Climate & Climate Change
Where the output of computer software is held in higher regard than observational data, where marketing spin is more important than fact and evidence, and where a trenchant defence of the notion of man-made global warming is seen as paramount… Read more here.
Wow, the article is a great summary!
“It ignored recognised natural climate forces and declared that recent variations in climate were attributable to human activity.”
Utter piffle. Of course natural forces are taken into consideration. Read the IPCC report.
SJT wrote:
“Utter piffle. Of course natural forces are taken into consideration. Read the IPCC report.”
I have NOT read any of the IPCC reports. Have you actually read and understood the most recent one from cover to cover? And I don’t just mean the summary for policymakers (and for the Great Unwashed). If not, how can you be so confident that natural forces were really taken into consideration?
To filk an old saying, climate change scientists were created in order to make economists look good. Here’s what Psychic Larry’s crap detector says.
Climate Change is not well understood. In their heart of hearts, many of the CC modelers know this. Rather than making honest caveats, they simply invent fake numbers for the impacts of putative CC drivers, including natural climate forces, taking care that CO2 and other Greenhouse Gases usually come out as the 800-pound gorilla of CC for the last several decades. If a climate model does NOT show GGs as the control variable, then they revise their guestimates until it does.
This is not real science; it’s masturbating with silicon, in order to arrive at a foregone conclusion. This is why the IPCC models have essentially zero predictive–i.e. scientific–value. I don’t see how anyone with more than half a brain can take the IPCC’s glorified Cargo Cult argument seriously.