Help. Received the following media release from the University of Queensland today. Can’t find “the research” amongst the conclusions, platitudes and dogma…
Scientists warn: Climate change inaction betrays the young
4 December 2013
Most of the Earth’s remaining fossil fuels must be left in the ground to avoid disastrous consequences for today’s young people and for future generations, according to research published today.
The research is co-authored by 18 scientists from around the world, including University of Queensland Global Change Institute Director Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg.
The research was led by former NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies Director Dr James Hansen, and is published in the Plos One journal.
The authors issue grave warnings about the safety of global warming by 2100, saying the scientifically accepted two degree guardrail has been severely underestimated.
The paper presents urgent strategies of emission reduction to achieve a more sustainable 1°C target.
The study states that only a maximum atmospheric CO2 level of 350 parts per million (reduced from about 400 today) will keep warming by 2100 to a maximum of 1°C.
This is believed to be sustainable based on an evaluation of impacts on sea-level rise, shifting climate zones, species extermination, coral reef ecosystems, climate extremes, human health, and the ecological and environmental consequences of fossil fuel extraction.
Lead author Dr James Hansen states that global reforestation and emission reductions need to start within the next decade to achieve the 1°C target by 2100.
“Emission reductions are needed urgently. These will occur only if fossil fuels are made to pay their costs to society. The most effective action is a rising carbon fee collected from fossil fuel companies, stimulating transition to clean energies.”
Professor Hoegh-Guldberg said letting targets ‘slip’ would cause impacts that were irreversible on timescales of more than thousands of years.
“Given that the evidence is unambiguous about the role of fossil fuel emissions in pushing our planet beyond a safe climate, there is no other option left but to rapidly reduce our use of fossil fuels.”
“Not to, would be to discard the future for many of today’s young people – and those unborn – who have not been party to the decisions that are being currently made about their future,” he said.
Media: UQ Global Change Institute Director Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, 0401 106 604. Kate Hannah, Communications Officer, Global Change Institute, k.hannah@uq.edu.au or 0425 752 904.
About the Global Change Institute:
The Global Change Institute at The University of Queensland, Australia, is an independent source of game-changing research, ideas and advice for addressing the challenges of global change. The Global Change Institute advances discovery, creates solutions and advocates responses that meet the challenges presented by climate change, technological innovation and population change.
About Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg:
Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is the inaugural Director of the UQ Global Change Institute and Professor of Marine Science, at The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia as well as being Deputy Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies. He is the Queensland Smart State Premier’s Fellow (2008-2013), coordinating lead author of Chapter 30, “Open Oceans”, in the IPCC’s (Working Group 2) 5th assessment and was elected to the Australian Academy of Science this year.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
It’s from a paper by activist James Hansen & several other alarmist scientists.
The paper can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/1kaoDBj
It’s a tired re-hash of the same old catastrophic global warming memes.
Another recent shamefully alarmist report is just out from the U.S. National Academy of Science. The CAGW-by-CO2 alarmists are desperately calling for action NOW, more funding & carbon taxes, as nature debunks the whole Catastrophic AGW meme. The ridiculous alarmist scare meme is exhibited by a photoshopped map showing that Delaware & much of Maryland would be under water IF all of Greenland & all of Antarctica ice caps melted. Like that’s going to abruptly happen soon. LOL.
The NAS report can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/1cThnHI
If you don’t have an account, you can download free as a “guest”.
Cheers.
If Hansen reduces CO2 by as much as he wants to – an impossible task by the way – all his forests will die because they need CO2 to grow. Stupid man!!!
Now the climate clowns are cycling back tothe 350 schtick. Can they do anything original at all? There is no evidence at all that the >350 CO2 ppm has had any negative impacts on anything humans orthe environrment does. All this rent seeking press release can offer is platitudes and broad claims of doom. For a $billion per day, the climate hype indsutry certainly should be able to do better. But the reality is they are diog the best they can to hype cliamte fear. All they have is misrepresentation, fear, and future doom to peddle. Fortunately, since a real problem would be terrible for us all, there is no climate crisis. Just demands for money and power from CO2 obsessed kooks.
Whadayaknow! James Hansen is in on this latest caper. Hansen has retired from NASA, after reaping in more than 1 million USD over the years, from his extracurricular activites (in violation of the Hatch Act). Here’s a link to a pic of Hansen in his heyday, plus 2 of his fellow climate zombies.
http://tinyurl.com/kwcyjo8
Help Wanted?
Sorry Ms. Jen, no help here. It is too late. There is no hope.
22 November 2013, Quote:We are now at a tipping point that threatens to flip the world into a full blown climate emergency. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has confirmed that the debate over climate science is over.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/21/warsaw-climate-talks-the-worlds-poorest-cannot-wait-for-a-2015-deal?CMP=twt_gu
Well, no hope for the lunatic doomsday individuals who ‘believe’ this scientific ‘crap’ like the named eighteen ‘scientists’ above. Plus Luke & Bazza.
Back in reality, there is help for anyone who ‘believes’ in man made Alarmist Global Warming, and that is the advice of the UN-IPCC itself.
Quote Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III:
“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.”
http://www.thegwpf.org/ipcc-official-climate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth/
.
Who has yet to free themselves from the illusion … ?
So 350ppmv is okay but 400 ppmv is a disaster? Can anyone here or anywhere show why this is the case?
If say we reduced co2 to 350 ppmv today ( and it remained there for another 86 years) tell us what that would mean to temps by say 2030, 2050 or 2100. And why, afterall these scientists???? believe the ice core record I presume?
Average lag time is hundreds of years according to the record, but sometimes thousands of years.
That means we still have to have a temp reduction first before there is any reduction of co2. So how long would that take, 200 years, 500 years or 1,000 uears or more?
Even silly Flannery believes in a lag time for co2 of hundreds of years or perhaps a thousand years. And of course that’s if the ENTIRE HUMAN WORLD stopped emitting co2 today.
But remember these 18 dingalings are only presuming a reduction of 50 ppmv, still at least 70 ppmv above levels in 1800. So Luke and bazza how does this all pan out, please explain the science involved in this hoped for temp reduction?
I can’t find a reference to the paper on the Plos one site. Something amiss or have they jumped the gun?
Lomborg states in his book that Gore uses Hansen as his intellectual backup for the CAGW science and for the sci-fi flick AIT.
But he also used former CSIRO heavyweight??????? Dr Graeme Pearman as well. Just a pity none of these people seem to understand simple kindy maths.
The EIA show future human co2 emission increases( until 2040) are OECD 6% and non OECD 96%.
If they were fair dinkum they would be annoying China and India etc because the wealthy western countries will nearly flatline for the next 27 years. In fact the projections for the EU and USA show little increase at all in co2 emissions until 2040.
This couldn’t be easier to understand but these fools waste billions of taxpayer $ every year and have displayed this inter-decadal ignorance since 1990.
The resultant bottom line since 1990 is non OECD co2 emissions are soaring but little change from the OECD and zip lowering of the temp by 2100.
All this screeching about world government and catastrophic framing is really just Tea Party tripe for 2GB talkback lovers.
Stupidity beats science every day. Nifty Neville our resident climate crim and disinformer advocates rampant CO2 growth. His latest – Tisdale is going so fast he might make a few blues. What quality. NO reductions Neville – how high do you want to go is the question?
Anyway morning tea will on at the nursing home soon boys.
Might be some lammies today in the clapped out codgerian science wing. You can have a good froth and then a nap. And look forward to the talk by the clairvoyant on Phlogiston after lunch.
Meanwhile Coalition STUFFS up the NBN – HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA
Who would have guessed. Sucked in !
http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-co-cant-guarantee-libs-50mbps-speed-promise-report-7000023901/?s_cid=e551&ttag=e551
http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-faces-high-risk-from-fttn-related-it-development-nbn-co-7000023801/
Good as the war with Indon boats policy. Rednecks at full revs.
In any event there are serious problems with some of their basic logic.
1. The developing countries are standing on the shoulders of a lot of hard work by the developed countries undertaken over the years, and are therefore the beneficiaries of that industrial development, innovation. and enlightenment. This means all countries should be treated the same.
Why should western nations be penalised for NOT being some un-democratic medieval dictators hell hole. It was a struggle break out of that mould, that has shown the way for the non developed countries to learn from.
2. Determining relativities solely by an emissions per capita is complete b/s. It has to have a component for the land and sea area each country is occupying and has sovereign responsibility for, (ie, if someone wants to take it away then that is tantamount to an invasion), and, for which it is known, the level to which that area acts as a carbon sink.
In which case one would logically think that Australia should be charging others for use of our carbon sinks or at east get credit for that.
3. If Co2 is such a detriment, why is it possible to penalise ones local energy intensive industries to reduce internal emissions, but then willingly promote the export of huge volumes of coal so the external emissions are increased. Despite the use of offsetting grants etc., energy intensive industries in Australia and UK/Europe are moving elsewhere.
4.Just how stupid are we to use a calculation that says that he who chops the tree down cops the penalty, and we then wood chip for export to Japan etc, but the same principal doesn’t apply to who it is that digs up the coal. It should be the ones who create the emissions… full stop… but it isn’t.
5 Why is that the UN/IPCC has allowed it self to be dominated by left wing greeny activists even the extent that they dominate if not exert great influence, in the COP and IPCC forums.
I don’t recollect ever voting for them anywhere at any time.
It seems to me that the fundamental premises are all wrong irrespective of whether or not the science is kosher.
But then what’s new….
It is entertaining to see the true believers avoid the issues: a science news release with no science. And instead a screechy little press release restating already disproven assertions about 350 ppm., and more mindless drivel about magic tipping points.
Run away, believer!
Oh no, it’s WTWT! Everything that hasn’t happened yet is Worse Than We Thought! And when it doesn’t happen, we’ll think of some more stuff that hasn’t happened yet. And that stuff can be Worse Than We Thought. Got it? (Don’t argue. The head professor of WTWT has a Scandinavian name that’s hyphenated. You can’t beat that kind of sophistication. You common anglo redneck codgers with your lamington dandruff!)
Now the NBN Co is warning us that more stuff is Worse Than We Thought! (Actually, guys, we took one look at your organisation and at a single crew trying to dig up a few metres of one Sydney street…and it was indeed a thousand times WTWT.)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/debt-deal-wont-boost-transparency-bowen/story-fn3dxiwe-1226775673362
No Luke,
I think Hockey sums up your recent tantrums better in this release:
Labor behaving like a jilted lover: Hockey
Mr Hockey said that the reaction of Labor to the debt deal was “absolutely bizarre”.
“It’s like a husband being upset that their ex-wife went off and had a cup of coffee with some other man, ……”
The NBN was in serious trouble well before the coalition won at the recent election and the spying scandal was actually under Labor’s watch too.
I’m finding it incredibly amusing that people are arguing that the coalition could have caused such things as bushfires and typhoons and spying scandals and NBN blowouts/failures, a thumbs down from the international climate community etc etc etc in such an incredibly short timeframe. 🙂 🙂
It’s rather unlikely that they’re that clever.
More clueless nonsense from Luke, about as stupid as his intervention on the Greenland temp record.
I agree with Debbie, the Coalition have already stopped most of the boats, sussed out Labor’s corrupt and looney NBN mess and are trying to mend Labor’s spying record against Indonesia etc.
But they’ve only been in govt for five minutes and it will take them a lot longer to fix the hopeless mess left by the most idiotic govts in OZ history.
BTW here’s Lindzen addressing the US congress on co2 emissions, AGW and extreme weather events etc. What a sane voice of commonsense and reason he is and we should applaud him.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/richard_lindzen_cool_it_on_the_climate/
The fraudulent CDM market has collapsed by 95% in the last 5 years. Unbelievable criminal waste of borrowed funds for a guaranteed zero change for temp and climate by 2100.
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/12/un-315billion-cdm-carbon-market-comatose-after-warsaw-it-may-last-years/#more-32079
More incredible waste of taxpayer funds trying to prop up all the mitigation con games. Why don’t they cease this corruption and fraud and just agree to spend a small portion of those wasted billions on more research into new safe 4th gen nuclear energy?
Hi Jennifer,
I’ve just been having a look at some of your posts and the comments on salinity.
Has there really been nothing since 2007 ? After all it was THE big issue back then. Millions of hectares were going to be rendered useless according to the experts and their models. Millions, perhaps Billions of taxpayers dollars were mobilised. Looking back at it now, the threat seems to have been exaggerated grossly.
I wonder how long it will be until we are not talking about catastrophic global warming?
A new study shows that west Antarctic warming since 1950 is the same as other periods of warming in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Amazing what natural warming can do and all without that extra co2. Amazing.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/05/new-ice-core-record-shows-climate-variability-in-west-antarctica/#more-98594
Not only is it “Help, I can’t find the research”, it’s also a game of Waldo finding the scientists.
Check out the list of leading climate experts.
At least one of them, Van Susteren, appears to have received her “climate expertise” entirely via Al Gore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lise_Van_Susteren
Remember “An Inconvenient Truth” slideshow pantomime class, The Climate Project? That’s the one.
{If the lessons were delivered straight from Gore’s knee, perhaps Van Susteren is the reason for Tipper instructing Al in the ways of the divorce court}
Another day sooking at the nursing home.
Sorry I made a mistake in my second comment above when I said, “The EIA show future human co2 emission increases( until 2040) are OECD 6% and non OECD 96%.”
Of course the non OECD percentage is 94% increase not 96%. Sorry, Grrrrrrr.
Yes good point Dave,
We hardly ever hear about salinity now.
However there were some management issues that did need to be addressed.
The alarmism over the GBR is similar. For as long as I can remember the GBR has been doomed according to the reporting and the funding.
Many claims made in the report urled by RealOldOne2 high on dire warnings, lots of papers cited re claims maide, global temps, more climate extremes, ocean acidification, meant to be a n daunting list.
A claim is made of energy imbalance, that measuring the changing heat content of the ocean is the most vital measurement. Re Argus floats cites Levitus, see Roger Pielke Snr22/04/12 on that paper which shows using either the 1955-2010 time period in Levitus or 1990-2010 the magnitudes of ocean warming are significantly less than Hansen claimed 2005.The paper also citesPM Barker etal abstract below. Flawed data. fer their most critical measurement of energy imbalance.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2011JTECHO831.1
What’s Real
Our common experience with hurricanes, tornadoes thunderstorms, blizzards, floods, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions should lead to the common sense conclusion that weather and climate are controlled by natural laws on an enormous scale that dwarfs human activity. Those laws engender forces and motions in our atmosphere and oceans that are beyond human control. Weather and climate existed long before humans appeared on Earth, and will continue to exist in the same way long after we are gone.
Those forces and motions are driven by the following: First, the motions of the Earth relative to the Sun: the periodic changes in its elliptical orbit, its rotation about its polar axis, changes in the tilt of that axis, and the precession of that axis. Second, the variation in solar activity that influences the radiant energy reaching the Earth and modulates cosmic ray activity which controls cloudiness. Third, the distribution of land and water on the Earth’s surface; which controls its temperature distribution, moisture availability, monsoon effects, hurricanes, and other storm tracks. Fourth, the topography of the Earth’s surface which causes copious precipitation on the windward side of mountains and aridity on the leeward side. Fifth, the fluid motions within the Earth’s oceans that determine moisture availability and ocean surface temperatures (El Nino and La Nina cycles). Sixth, volcanic eruptions that throw large amounts of dust into the atmosphere, increasing the Earth’s albedo and periodically blocking portions of solar radiation from reaching the Earth’s surface.
Water in all of its forms is a main agent through which those forces operate. It provides vapor in the atmosphere, heat transport by evaporation and condensation, and the enormous, circulating mass of the ocean whose heat capacity dominates. And finally it provides the cloud, snow, and ice cover that control the radiative balance between the Sun, the Earth, and free space.
While the presence of 0.04 % of CO2 in our atmosphere is essential for life in the biosphere, the notion that such a minor constituent of the atmosphere can control the above forces and motions, is absurd. There is, in fact, not one iota of reliable evidence that it does.
Dr. Martin Hertzberg
Martin does the non-science appeal to teensy weensy after telling us the obvious. Forces and motion eh? and evaporation too. It’s all too much. “There is, in fact, not one iota of reliable evidence that it does.” hmmmmm – must cite that Dr H. Pers Comm.
“Those laws engender forces and motions in our atmosphere and oceans that are beyond human control. ” This sort of thing must be natural then http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/08/14/science/14fenc_ready.html
Anyway – lah de dah – and back at the the real science
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013EF000165/pdf
Trenberth. Wow, what a shocker. Like Al Gore with a degree. Unlike Gore, he’s heavily into “natural variability”. (He’s been finding that concept quite handy in recent NH winters, including the present one.) I dare say Trenberth knows you can’t get down to “millions of degrees” with “special drill bits”.
Otherwise, just stunts. Gore with a degree.
Silly me – made the mistake of following one of Luke’s links – the trenberth one:
“The PDO is essentially a natural mode of variability, although there are questions about how it is affected
by the warming climate, and so the plateau in warming is not because global warming has ceased. The
evidence supports continued heating of the climate system as manifested by melting of Arctic sea ice
and glaciers, as well as Greenland, but most of the heat is going into the oceans and increasingly into
the deep ocean, and thus contributes to sea-level rise. The analysis in this article does not suggest that
global warming has disappeared; on the contrary, it is very much alive but being manifested in somewhat
different ways than a simple increase in global mean surface temperature.”
Pathetic – the heat is hiding in the ocean deep, the dog ate my lunch, the cheque is in the mail. To think Trenberth is paid to write such rubbish. And this contributes to sea level rise – hahahaha
Its a travesty!!!
Lift your game Luke.
Luke,
you never did answer my question re who does/doesn’t have unquestionable authority in science.
I note you seem to think there is a distinction and you call something ‘real science’?
Apparently Trenberth is ‘real’ for you?
Why would his work be ‘real science’ yet someone like Ove Humlum’s or Judith Curry’s or Walter Starck’s or Bob Carter’s not be considered ‘real science’?
Gee what non-scientific codgerian responses. One may even say an appalling level of pig ignorance.
sp’s analysis – err I don’t think so – well that’s a rebuttal – drivel but a rebuttal
Robert – meaningless random comment
Debbie – please don’t make me laugh. Are you actually serious. LMAO my dear !
Level of ability here = 0.0
Dinner time at the home soon. Friday too – might get some chips?
Gawd, Supercell’s into Trenberth. Now that really is worse than we thought.
The lack of embarrassment is almost admirable. Almost.
Jennifer, finally my response re Thomas Kuhn and normal science. Jest ter say,
in the argument I could have used yr paper on the Murray and Lwr lakes cf with
the Wentworth group of ‘Concerned’ Scientists. First thing I noticed, reading
your paper, was the historical MAP and history context, evidence based, in comparison to
theirs, (urgent) issues based.
Regards,
Beth-the-serf.
http://beththeserf.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/9th-edition-serf-under_ground-journal/
When these scary stories of increased co2 induced CAGW are promoted west Antarctic and Greenland warming always seem to be prominent because of so called dangerous future SLR.
But we know that the west antarctic ice sheet ( WAIS) was impacted a number of times during the holocene through colder and warmer periods and ditto Greenland.
A new study has found that there was reasonable synchronicity of the NH LIA with a colder period on the WAIS between 1400 and 1800.
The Orsi et al study found that during that period the temp was about 0.52c cooler than the average of the last 100 years.
The warmer period before 1400 would have coincided with the Med WP in the NH as well. And once again the warmer and cooler periods didn’t require a change in Aco2 levels.
http://nipccreport.org/articles/2012/sep/25sep2012a4.html
Nifty Nev being a climate scoundrel believes denier sites – if he had the decency to read the actual reference instead of parrot poop he would have noticed ” the details of these records are not in phase”
Nifty Nev the spreader of disinformation unchecked and unread.
More evidence of a warm period in west antarctica coinciding with the NH Med WP. This Hall et al study covers the period from approx 1000 to 1300 or 1000 to 700 years ago.
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/12/the-medieval-warm-period-hit-west-antarctica/
But more studies show a similar warm period in NZ and southern south America etc. No change in co2 levels required to observe fairly abrupt changes in the climate.
Luke!
You need to go back to Deltoid and team up with them.
They say things like ‘denier sites’.
BTW, I have always appreciated that you have a sense of humour, but I’m not sure why you thought my question was funny?
Please let me in on the joke.
I linked the quals of all those scientists when I originally asked the question.
What’s superior (or aurhoritian) about Trenberth that leads you to claim that his work is ‘real science’?
Luke here’s another link to the same study. We know you’re desperate, particularly after your Greenland temp nonsense but you do get a bit boring after a while.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051260/abstract
Interesting that November GAT is 0.1c lower than it was in 1988 when Hansen turned off the aircon and started this whole air con.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
That’s a good observation Spangled. Here’s the more recent west antarctic study of the last 300 years showing similar rates of warming in the 1800s and 1900s period to the present day .
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/05/new-ice-core-record-shows-climate-variability-in-west-antarctica/
Neville, thanks for those papers. Luke is hysterical, linking to Trenberth; I’ve been busy but I’ll come back to Trenberth’s latest. The man has no shame; he and luke must be related.
Yes, good one Neville, I sent the link on to make a point in another discussion.
Cohers perhaps Gore could add Trenberth to his stable of expert consultants. He already has Hansen and OZ’s Pearman on board and he is fully cashed up after selling out his TV station to big ( Arab) oil.
The more groupthinking, BS and con tricks the more Lukey loves it, he’s just like a blowie around a dung heap.
BTW it seems even sardines are impacted by natural climate change. Bring back the warm PDO they say.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/warmists_slapped_with_a_cold_sardine/#commentsmore
If Richard Muller has a point about the benifits of fracking, why shouldn’t the left also promote the use of new, safe nuclear power generation?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/06/richard-muller-why-every-serious-environmentalist-should-favour-fracking/#more-98698
Dave from WeeWaa
You are wrong! We lost on salinity and we are losing on AGW.
That salinity is a huge problem in the Murray Darling is now an accepted fact globally, published in the technical literature, and has been legislated into The Basin Plan.
My scribbles have been for ignored… except perhaps by you and a few others who live with the evidence and read the detail.
Nifty Nev has now discovered a thing called an abstract. Try reading the actual paper and stop spreading disinformation. It’s not too much to ask.
Bolt must be on a low news day. His sardine post is moronic. Wreally? Neville we know where Bolt and WUWT are – do we need a cut and paste every single day of the disinformation and rubbish they promote. Why not be selective on some for the better ones.
So isn’t it remarkable – a landmark paper by Trenberth and it’s above the intellectual ability of the blog to take in and discuss. Too hard. That why you’re non-science deniers I guess.
Beth, Thanks for the link to your essay, and for your essay comparing Kuhn and Popper. However, I think you have made a major error in your interpretation of Kuhn – confusing what he documents as how normal science actually operates versus what might be considered an ideal situation. Popper has a “better model”, its just that it does not reflect the reality of how science is done. Kuhn is about explaining the reality, warts and all. I will explain more at the thread which will be reopened on Wednesday. IN the meantime I’ve posted your link… http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/11/same-information-different-opinion-part-2-the-tragic-versus-utopian-vision-of-climate-science
Nift Nev and SD – the Greenland fraudsters – http://i2.wp.com/hot-topic.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/GISP210klarge.png
You’ll never live your fraud down guys.
Luke – “a landmark paper by Trenberth”
No, just rehash of the same old rubbish ………. the heat is hiding in the deep ocean ……. pathetic
I think you’re right Jennifer. We are losing the AGW war despite winning every battle.
Luke, I’ll get back to you about Trenberth and Fasullo; thanks for the link; it’s a terrible paper for a couple of obvious reasons.
Firstly it contradicts what this pair we’re saying as recently as 2009:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009GL037527/abstract
They say:
“Annual global fluctuations in TOA energy of up to 0.2Wm−2 occur from natural variations in clouds,
aerosols, and changes in the Sun.”
Yet in this respect Ramanthan says about clouds alone:
“clouds exert a large global cooling effect (about –15 to –20 W m–2 globally),”
From here:
http://web.iitd.ac.in/~sagnik/Albedo.pdf
Page 18
And then Trenberth says:
“More than 90% of the heat goes into the oceans”
But forgets to mention all of that comes out:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/annual-forcing-into-out-of-the-ocean.jpg
As to Earth Energy Imbalance since 2000; that is plain wrong; read Pinker and Knox and Douglass etc.
Luke here’s the REAL factual Greenland temps for the last 150+ plus years. Just look at the graphs for the seasons and the annual graph.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2006/11/17/cooling-the-debate-a-longer-record-of-greenland-air-temperature/
You should stop peddling that fraudulent graph you fool. Lomborg’s team looked at the above Vinther et al study and were amazed at the much warmer 1920s to 1940s when compared to the period up to the cooler 1990s.
Your graph should be chucked in the garbage.
Thanks fer reply, Jennifer. You may well be right. Good ter have the exchange.
Bts
Neville – nobody believes denier disinformation sites- so stop being a fraud and quoting them. Nobody believes funded shills, right wing think tanks and shonkies Neville. We’re not talking whole of Greenland anyway. It’s the GISP site and don’t try to wiggle out of your fraud.
Like who the hell do you lot really think you are? You have like the dyspeptics party no influence on the course of events. You’ve not wanted – so emigrate – leave for Tea Party anti-science redneck heaven. You have no publications, no comprehensive philosophy, no science, no style and certainly no substance. Declare them illegal.
Neville if you’re not a peddler of disinformation perhaps you could tell us about the issues with the inhomogeneities adjustment in the citation – unless you’re so morally bankrupt that you’d be quoting a paper you haven’t read. Won’t be an answer will there ? – HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAAA – you utter shonk !
Luke you’ve been caught out telling porkies so stop trying to deny the truth. Look at the Vinther, Jones, Briffa graphs and tables and wake up.
Ahh Luke,
where would you be without the fraudulent junk science you tout…
Been watching the news of even worse winter weather this year?? I know a LOT of people who are sick of hearing about Gorebull Warming as their hours of heating goes up every winter and the energy bills skyrocket based on the BS policies you tiny brained commies promote.
Feel good about killing old people and little children along with some healthier types yet??
Y’all called Bush a baby killer, yet, your IDEOLOGY kills far more than any poorly targeted munitions launched by US forces.
Ah that would be the result of the right wing excess that freaks like you call a democracy? Hush your Tea Party mouth.
I see Neville hasn’t read the paper again like the disinformist that he is. Can’t read papers can you Neville? Have to be told what to think don’t you?
Have to be told what to think?
🙂 🙂 🙂
hahahahaha!!
Very funny Luke!
Just as well we have SkepticalScience to counterbalance all those denier disinformation sites.
Hey Luke – how often do you report to your controller at SchlepticalScience?
Good to see Dana representing the warmist side by acting like an adult and demonstrating high standards!!!
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/05/the-self-induced-implosion-of-dana-nuccitelli/
I may well be wrong Jennifer, I’ve been wrong before.
However I think the great salinity scare of ten to twenty years ago can be cited as an example of alleged experts and authorities being totally hoodwinked by computer models. Or possibly of experts using dodgy models to hoodwink authorities.
It wasn’t the regulations or the millions of dollars that saved millions of hectares from dryland salinity. The models were wrong.
It should be a cautionary tale against taking too much notice of experts and models claiming knowledge of the future climate.
Luke, you are the greatest promoter of scientific garbage I have ever come across.
According to that manipulated graph of yours GAT went up ~ 2.5c between 1845 and 1855
Moronic SD – you are actually mental – you actually think Greenland = GAT. I guess that’s your level of intelligence isn’t it. Book yourself in for therapy quickly and try to stop lying.
Well sp – I’m sure your evil political backers pay you much more for your fraudulent shilling. BTW – I make a habit of not reading Wattsfrabricatedwiththat – so wasting your cite.
You are the moron Luke, claiming paleo perfection. Whether its global or NH, are you seriously claiming those graph adjustment points on the right hand side to be correct?
No Luke – you read real science stuff at SkepticalScience:
I just thought I’d list the Greenland temp record of Vinther et al from 1921 to 2000. A period of 80 years.
The period from 1921 to 1970 ( 50 years) had an average annual temp of minus -1.0c while the average annual temp for the period 1971 to 2000 ( 30 years) was minus -2.1c .
The period 1921 to 1970 was much warmer than 1971 to 2000. The warmest year was 1941 and the warmest period was 1931 to 1950.
The Suzuki numbskull admits he has failed, let’s hope we’ve seen the end of him.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/07/the-effects-of-environmentalist-and-climate-alarmist-crying-wolf-begin-to-appear/#more-98717
Some of Stormtroopers Luke rushing to stem the breach?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/07/the-bogosity-of-winter-storm-bodil/#more-98732
Luke has on some ocassions disputed the credentials of Jo Nova and David Evans. Here is a list of David’s degrees etc from a post by Jo in 2011. Incredibly impressive. He is a very bright fellow.
Joanne Nova
June 15, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Pat #11. Yes Yes, DeSmog love to attack credentials. What else can they do when the evidence doesn’t go their way? Oh if only someone at Desmoggy had half of David’s degrees.
David Evans Qualifications From Stanford: Ph.D. Electrical Engineering , M.S. Electrical Engineering, M.S. Statistics, and from Uni Sydney: B.E. Electrical Engineering (First Class Honours), University Medal (1983), M.A. Applied Mathematics, B.Sc. Applied Mathematics and Physics (Uni Sydney).
“Researched topics in image processing, digital signal processing, Fourier analysis, fast computation of transforms, information theory, and game theory. Thesis introduced an improved version of the Fourier transform.”
You can always cut n paste these qualifications back. Don’t forget to add, of course, David must be a fool, because DeSmog – the PR agency for Hoggan and Associates — says so. They would know wouldn’t they?
——————————————————————————–
More verballing by nifty Nev – I don’t dispute their qualifications or their high intelligence. Doesn’t mean they have relevant domain expertise though as Jo’s latest post so ably demonstrates. Dunning-Kruger-esque. Do Davey’s a super-duper rocket scientist – like wow and how cool to have a dinner party with – but some of us actually know what b/s is in Fullcam and how they wouldn’t be told.
Don’t complain about Desmogblog with the sleazy scumoid antics and denial of service attacks that you lot get up to. Hypocrisy.
And nifty Nev – “image processing, digital signal processing, Fourier analysis, fast computation of transforms, information theory, and game theory.” Yep CSIRO has heaps of them ! Boring.
Luke oh Luke, the verballer non-pareil attributes ter others … apply irony tag 🙂
Beth-the-serf.
Supercell defends Desmogblog and SkepticalScience.
What a pedigree. What a guy!!! Says it all.
Hey Luke, look what your hero Stefan does with graphs, and ‘your’ ABC on radio today, scares the possums in Queensland as a result.
http://pindanpost.com/2013/12/08/scary-graph-threatens-climate/
Once again sceptics have been proven correct in their opposition to the Labor/Green’s co2 tax. The results show a complete waste of 6 billion $ for a zero return. And all that waste in just the first 12 months. Surprise, surprise, SARC.
But we know that Luke and bazza will think that’s a good return on the poor taxpayer’s hard earned dollars. Remember the 18 dingalings above think we should have a much more severe co2 tax of 20 or 30% reduction as well.
What hope have we got when these experts????? don’t even understand simple kindy maths?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/labors_6_billion_carbon_tax_made_no_difference/#commentsmore
Hi Dave
“It should be a cautionary tale against taking too much notice of experts and models claiming knowledge of the future climate.”
I agree completely. It could be a cautionary tale. But it has been ignored by the mainstream. The average person has no idea that the Murray Darling is not ruin to salt and climate change.
Why does there seem to be so little global warming? The new study on SLR by Chen, Feng and Huang finds a deceleration in the rise and probable 7 inches or 17.5 cm by 2100.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/new-paper-finds-sea-level-rise-has.html Much of the deceleration is due to a slowing of thermal expansion over the last 10 years and a change in the PDO.
Just more evidence if needed that OZ should repeal Labor’s clueless co2 tax immediately. You can find a link to the paper at the bottom of the article.
This Abbott quote at the end of a post by one of Jo Nova’s boggers is about as good as it gets.
Safetyguy66
December 8, 2013 at 6:27 pm · Reply
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/12/07/22/41/carbon-tax-having-little-effect-report
http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=932007
And that’s with a price that is so out of kilter with anything happening anywhere else on the planet, that we can only assume if the system ever got to the stage where it transitions to an ETS at EU prices per unit, emissions would be more likely to rise than fall.
http://www.dw.de/eu-states-approve-backloading-fix-to-rescue-blocs-carbon-emissions-trade/a-17213997
Pricing carbon is the only solution huh? Yup if your a drooling imbecile I can see how you might think that….
Abbott described the idea of an emissions trading scheme as a ”so-called market in the non-delivery of an invisible substance to no one”
Abbott’s quote above is a gem.
Well even more ding-a-lings – Tom Harley – now reckons Bellenden Ker temperatures = all of Queensland or even Brisbane. Don’t make us laugh Tom – this is an evidence based blog. Do better. See them scurry for a local site ……
I see Nifty Nev – our resident promoter of disinformation from the likes of Timsdale now believes in unrestrained CO2 growth. Classy. Nifty tell us did you read the actual paper or just go the disinformationist op-ed with your usual non-duty of care to readers?
Your Trenberth paper is a gold mine luke, or should that be a manure factory. Let’s have a contest; I quote one dumb line from it and you retaliate with a sensible line; here’s my first which is also the first line of the paper!
“How often have we heard “Wow it’s cold, where is global warming?”
It is not simply that the AGW true believers are CO2 kooks and wave their arms about vague ominous future events, or make up crap about current weather being ‘more extreme’ and dangerous than ‘before’ . And that the more cynical of the AGW hypesters are caught fabricating evidence, faking photos, etc. is not unusual. That is in itself no more dangerous than UFO kooks and their men in black and abductions and phony UFO evidence. It is that the kooks have access to real money and power. And have reduced themselves to the level of an ignorant peasant mob looking to blame a bad crop or dead cow on their magical thinking. But it is even worse: some of the climate kooks are willing to burn down the entire world to save it from their CO2 obsession.
Well looks like we have proof that Cohenite was a consortium. He/she/it/they/them have certainly gone backwards. Probably explains in a neutral year why 2013 will be Australia’s warmest. Next !
““How often have we heard “Wow it’s cold, where is global warming?”” – every time sceptics need a diversion or low news day.
There’s only one reason you’re biting matey – it’s got to hurt and you’re not published and never will be. None of you are up to it.
Hunter the dead cow died from a new thing called microbes. Which sceptics have decided is a worldwide conspiracy to put shamans out of business. How could such a small thing as a microbe kill a big thing like a cow – preposterous. It’s teensy weensy. At Watts-mooey-with-that and Hereford audit, the bovine exorcism movement denied any involvement in funding.
Boy, I wouldn’t have thought it possible but the witch doctor is getting worse. Listen Lukey please expain how OZ wasting 6 billion $ down the plughole has helped to fix your CAGW fantasy?
Will he and bazza ever wake up? No chance.
Wow, go away for a few days and look what happens, this thread is all over the shop. Luke, you’re nuts, but very funny…
Here’s one of Luke and bazza’s favourite sites. http://www.climatecouncil.org.au/ Their chief witch doctor Flannery gives a very tired message to the faithful and promises to give independent, apolitical expert advice to the little fantasists.
Just so long as they don’t forget to keep sending money they’ll get the sort of science and maths challenged nonsense you’d expect from their ABC, Climate institute, Fairfax media, most of the Unies, IPCC, Labor/Greens etc, etc.
But I suppose it’s good for a laugh.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/08/21817579-take-extra-precautions-massive-wintry-storm-system-hits-country-hard-as-it-plows-eastward?lite
For warmists, the stunt is to go counter-intuitive and nag on the “extreme” nature of this weather. For “coming ice age” believers the stunt is to go literal and make all kinds of assumptions about solar cycles etc.
For prudent Australians it’s a warning to better exploit and manage the superb coal resources of the Sydney-Gunnedah Basin and modernise our coal power generation – to run industries and keep humans as warm and cool as they deserve to be. (I’m not in the pay of Big Coal, by the way. I mean, just because I totally love the gorgeous stuff…)
Luke,
According to the AGW faithful, the cow died from CO2. But fundies have trouble with metaphor. Do, however, keep on dodging dancing and weaving- your aerobic capacity must be worldclass from having to do so much so frequently for the good ol’ CO2 obsession.
Consortium?
You mean like the multiple personalities of those who support AGW?
Anyway I’ll [emphasis on first person singular] will take it that as meaning you can’t find a sensible quote from the Trenberth effort? I couldn’t either which is why I knew I was on a winner.
And you know I’ve been published luke, as if that means anything given the calibre of the so-called peer-reviewed efforts coming out from the likes of Trenberth, Cook, Lewandowski etc. Haven’t I done multiple posts on the execrable quality of the papers supporting AGW?
You’re the original AGW Xmas Grinch luke; you suggest some interesting games and then take your bat and ball home. What a spoilt little sod you are.
Hey Luke it’s snowing in OZ in the summer. Boy must mean globull cooling. But some great photos showing the winter like conditions.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/snow-falling-in-australia-in-summer-that-is-all/story-e6frflp0-1226775945701
Published? Must have missed it. Unless it’s some soft non-reviewed op-ed trash or free-range online thing worth 20 cents.
Hey Neville read your own article which you NEVER do – “Snow is not a freak event in southern Australia in the warmer months. A small dusting usually appears on the higher parts of the Australian Alps at least once each summer.”
Pity 2013 will be a record mate !
Robert indicates the nutty squirrels approach to AGW _- hey Mum it snowed therefore ….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCCBzJL8I5g Time for some jazz ….
Threshold intelligence tests keep failing for our kayak fire fighters.
Geeezzzzz Lukey I was taking the wee wees you silly donk. But here’s another Flannery forecast about terrible bushfires etc, full of lies , exaggerations and half truths.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/flannery_should_explain_past_dud_predictions_before_whipping_up_fresh_scare/#commentsmore
So if you wanted to reduce OZ temps into the future you must have thought long and hard about how you would bring about this change?
So come on tell us how you would reduce our temp and by how much and when we would see the result.
Would we see a reult in 30 years, 70 years, 200 years, 1,000 years or 5,000+ years and by how much?
But remember the 6%/ 94% ratio and don’t forget India and China have at least a billion more people left to lift out of severe poverty. But give us your best shot.
“Robert indicates the nutty squirrels approach to AGW _- hey Mum it snowed therefore ….”
The opposite of the point I was clearly making. Otherwise, sharply observed by the man who sees dead supercells.
By the way, imagine there was presently a balmy winter in North America and Europe, instead of what they’re actually copping. My take on either kind of event would be “weather”. But would a balmy winter such as those before 2009 be accepted as mere “weather” by the one who sees dead supercells? Ah, I’m afraid the old feller would not be able to contain himself. Be honest now, Supe! You’re a compulsive drooler, aren’t you? Hard to hold back on any hot spell, any time, anywhere!
Of course it’s just weather.
2013 will be warmest since when?
That figure looks similar to the BoM’s conclusion that 2012 was 30% wetter than average.
I simply cannot understand how these “hottest than ever” temperatures are arrived at.
Where was it hotter?
I have records of our heating and AC usage for years past and if anything the heating bill is increasing the cooling is decreasing? So where is it warmer? Not in my part of Melbourne at any rate.
It’s an average/mean/median thingy JW.
They have become sooooooo enamoured with their high tech computers and massive data bases that they seem to have lost sight of who would need/use the information, why they would need it and how they would use it.
Let’s hope the police will now get to the bottom of this scam.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/awu_scandal_magistrate_rules_slater_gordon_documents_were_arguably_part_of_/
Debbie and JW do stupidity – I guess JW’s power bill is now source. Blog science at full revs. And why Debs is better at lammies. So according to “I’m only interested in the broad social aspects not the science Debs” -if one knew who would use the information you’d do a better job, another job or another analysis.
So if we had known denialists, spivs and shonks would have wanted the information the analysis would be cherry picked and cooked!
Well it’s high science principles here folks. Social attitudes and old age response to cold beats the mercury.
Of course scepos could get all the data and analyse it – given Cohers reports $100000s in expenditure on who knows what. But who’d want to do that and discover the truth (i.e. what you’re already being told). Sniping is easier.
Bob Tisdale replies to the latest Trenberth Fasullo drivel.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/09/trenberth-and-fasullo-try-to-keep-the-fantasy-alive/
Funny how Victoria’s Chief magistrate has a much higher opinion of Blewitt than does Gillard. Funny that.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/magistrate_differs_with_gillard_on_blewitt/#commentsmore
Tibsdale – my errors were so great and stats hopeless. What a sham Neville ! What a waste of space. The great error prone unpublished Timsley. You’re a disinformatist shyster.
When will Tisdale man up and write a rebuttal to the journal instead of publishing dross on disinformation sites? Too chicken and unable.
Luke?
Do you work for BoM?
You seem to have taken my criticism personally.
BoM has lost its way Luke. The super duper hi tech computers and the massive data bases are fantastic. But!
What is the purpose?
You say above that we’re being told the truth.
Conclusions like 2012 was 30% wetter than average and 2013 is warmest on record are statstical conclusions that are generated as a broad scale average/mean/median. That sort of info is easy to access at BoM. It’s interesting. But what truth do you think we’re being told and in what way do you expect it can be used?
The only deniers are those now advocating the missing heat to be in the oceans, deep down where it cant be measured. Shame sea level isn’t rising in line with the thermal expansion that would entail.
Really, this pseudo science has nothing to show for its huge scare campaign except to damage the image of science in general and lower global living standards and the deaths of thousands who cant afford to heat or cool.
The theory is unfalsifiable it would appear and is an embarrassment to mans stupidity.
You would think “climate” scientists would be embarrassed by the inability of their scary predictions to eventuate. But somehow despite a temperature stasis, no hot spot, no acceleration in sea level, no massive decline in ice sheets etc etc they have the hide to tell us its all worse than they thought.
How stupid do they think humans really are?!
@ luke
“Debbie and JW do stupidity – I guess JW’s power bill is now source”
No Luke I do better than rely on the ever increasing bills, I actually have a timer attached to the unit, it’s a reverse cycle, the most efficient heating and cooling.
But forget about that. I wish the most revered (by you!) BOM people would tell me why my tomatoes failed to ripen properly for a third year in a row despite having nursed them along in a hot house, never used to do that Luke, not in Melbourne! Even on the farm at Kyneton we had better summer crops, and it can be real cold there.
You can twist your data all you like, you can’t beat empirical evidence.
Well said Toby.
And it seems to me that Melbourne would have long since been saturated with the urban heat island effect.
Tomatoes thrive in warm soil. They drink lustily from the co2 ocean.
Did you water them? In a neighbor’s tree casting shade on the garden?
JW Tomatoes are kinda like the canary in the mine.