Climate Catastrophe

[EternalOptimist]

Don't forget Hansens big prediction

by 2028

the west side highway(in Manhatten) would be under water
the buildings windows would have tape due to high winds
water would be by request only
the birds would be different species due to the heat
even the trees would be different


well, we are two thirds of the way there now and seal levels have risen 50 mm out of the 3050 predicted.

he still stands by these claims
the guy is a deluded fruitcake

[d000hg]

So GW leads to increasing seals?

[pjclarke]

Don't forget Hansens big prediction

by 2028

the west side highway(in Manhatten) would be under water
the buildings windows would have tape due to high winds
water would be by request only
the birds would be different species due to the heat
even the trees would be different


well, we are two thirds of the way there now and seal levels have risen 50 mm out of the 3050 predicted.

he still stands by these claims
the guy is a deluded fruitcake

Dr James Hansen, adjunct professor at Columbia, retired head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies has co-authored several of the milestone papers on AGW, is a member of the US National Academy and was awarded the Carl Gustaf Rossby medal by the American Metoerological Society - its highest honour. (I could go on. And on.).

Naturally such a man must be discredited but how? Well, any obvious flaws in his science would have been picked up at review, so let us see what we can find in the media. Around about 1988 journalist Rob Reiss interviewed Hansen and over a decade later, Reiss recalled:-

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress. I went over to the window with him and looked out on Broadway in New York City and said, “If what you’re saying about the greenhouse effect is true, is anything going to look different down there in 20 years?” He looked for a while and was quiet and didn’t say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, “Well, there will be more traffic.” I, of course, didn’t think he heard the question right. Then he explained, “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.” Then he said, “There will be more police cars.” Why? “Well, you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.”

And so far, over the last 10 years, we’ve had 10 of the hottest years on record.

Note that he made a mistake on the conditional part, it was (probably) for 40 years and doubled CO2, as he later pointed out:-

"When I interviewed James Hansen I asked him to speculate on what the view outside his office window could look like in 40 years with doubled CO2. I'd been trying to think of a way to discuss the greenhouse effect in a way that would make sense to average readers. I wasn't asking for hard scientific studies. It wasn't an academic interview. It was a discussion with a kind and thoughtful man who answered the question. You can find the description in two of my books, most recently The Coming Storm.

Now it was an informal interview, memory can play tricks, and the language is ambiguous: was Hansen talking about 40 years and/or doubled CO2? (which would be 560ppm, we are so far at 400ppm ). Maybe we should discard it look at his professional work instead.... Nah, where's the fun in that?

What is amusing is how much mileage certain quarters try to get out of this trifle, studiously ignoring a career's worth of peer reviewed science. One denier site even posted up pictures of the West Side High (and dry) way, as it is now even though it has been rebuilt in the interim. We can check back when we reach doubled CO2, in the meantime, personally I would need rather better reasons to be 'sceptical' than this truly desperate ferrago .

PS, a bit cheeky, but here's the West Side Highway in 2012 ;-)




Stormy weather - Salon.com
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailin...gInTheRain.pdf

[pjclarke]

I did read them. You said:


LOL.

Oh, there are significant uncertainties? Ah, then perhaps this isn't true....

LOLOL.

Oh. We're looking to drive policy when there are uncertainties? Is anyone actually talking about those uncertainties in the Religious Education classes where this belief is propagated? How come anyone who expresses any such uncertainties in the public forum is ridiculed and shouted down? How come anyone who expresses any doubts about the certainties of this religion draws an immediate response from you?

I'll stick with my narrow definition, if I want to say things like this:

Because many, many scientific documents HAVE been produced based on the level of certainty that closely controlled experimentation gives. And NO document that seeks to project the future without those levels of controls can ever be considered on the same level.

The state religion has nothing to do with the Church of England anymore. We're all being taxed to support it, too.

You're getting a wee bit hung up on the phrase 'scientific document', of course there are different types and clearly a lab report of a controlled experiment will have more confidence than a literature review. I didn't realise I needed to spell that out. I thought it was obvious.

Uncertainty is a fact of life for policymakers, and policy is made on much less certainty, in fact compared to some areas the climate policymakers have it easy ...

If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. It's not about our analysis ... It's about our response.

VP Dick Cheney.

[pjclarke]

You did

But back to your new age sky fairy religion

I pasted some text from wiki. The text contained quotes from the various enquiries and links to their reports. Those are my evidence, wiki was just the conduit.

Now where is the evidence of 'rigged data'?

[pjclarke]

ask pj what are the benefits of GW

Actually, for someone my age, ignoring children, living in a rich, temperate country, there's a chance that the effects, including a milder climate, increased crop yields will be net beneficial during the rest of my lifetime.


Its those other poor b*st*rds.

[pjclarke]

Scientists and the global warming zealots have killed off any attemts to experiment with Ocean fertilisation technology. I wonder why

It doesn't work. HTH.

[AtW]

GW leads to increased taxes

FTFY

[MicrosoftBob]

I pasted some text from wiki. The text contained quotes from the various enquiries and links to their reports. Those are my evidence, wiki was just the conduit.

Now where is the evidence of 'rigged data'?

The University of East Anglia for starters, they rigged data to get the end result the want

The rigged data is settled, climate change is a fraud

[DimPrawn]

Actually, for someone my age, ignoring children, living in a rich, temperate country, there's a chance that the effects, including a milder climate, increased crop yields will be net beneficial during the rest of my lifetime.


Its those other poor b*st*rds.

You mean the 600,000 that arrive here every year in addition to the 10,000,000 that have arrived in the last 20 years?

They'll be fine if they bring a coat to keep warm.