Climate Change not so important

[BlasterBates]

What we see is short term variability around a long term (decadal) rising trend.

I don't see an decadal upwards trend, I see upwards, then downwards, then upwards and now it just beginning to head down again.

[BlasterBates]

now lets see how that compares to Hansen's prediction.

His redline prediction business as usual is wrong CO2 didn't rise as he predicted.

So we compare the orange line, not the yellow line. The orange line gives levels of CO2 comparable with what happened, the yellow line means cutting CO2 emissions i.e. holding them steady, which is not what happened.



As you can see his prediction is way off.

[DimPrawn]

Climate Change not so important?

Climate change belief given same legal status as religion - Telegraph

Burn the heretic!

[BlasterBates]

The ruling could open the door for employees to sue their companies for failing to account for their green lifestyles, such as providing recycling facilities or offering low-carbon travel.

Give them a horse and cart, the rest of us will drive around in BMW's.

[OwlHoot]

These days climate skeptics need to be careful who they bother engaging in arguments.

Alarmist spammer unleashes Twitterbot to stifle climate debate

Nigel Leck, an Australian software developer, grew tired of debating climate realists on Twitter so he created a spambot to “wear down” his opponents. The bot, @AI_AGW, scans Twitter every five minutes looking for key phrases commonly used by those who challenge the global warming orthodoxy. It then posts one of hundreds of canned responses hoping to frustrate skeptics. CFACT’s Twitter account @CFACT (follow us!) often receives many of these unsolicited messages each day. Since the bot became active on May 26, 2010, it has sent out over 40,000 tweets, or an average of more than 240 updates per day!

Technology Review gushed that Leck’s bot “answers Twitter users who aren’t even aware of their own ignorance.” Leck claims that his little bit of trollware is commonly mistaken as a genuine Twitter user leading the unsuspecting to sometimes debate it for days. Eventually it wears people down.

Leck’s bot is an innovative, yet appalling new tactic in the ongoing campaign by global warming proponents to stifle debate and end discussion of climate science and policy. Spamming Twitter users is a tactic that is likely to backfire, as have so many of the ploys alarmists have tried in the past. There is nothing internet users find more annoying than trolls using spam to shut down online discussions.

[EternalOptimist]

Hansen's predictions 22 years ago were from an early climate model (you could run it on a 386 these days). It also used a higher value for climate senstivity than our more modern estimates (around 4C versus 3C - this will have little impact in the early decades of a projection but will cause the model to over-estimate after that) and the actual emissions were about 5% at variance with Scenario B. Still, Gavin Schmidt of NASA

Phew! you had me going for a minute there pj.
I thought you had some evidence linking human activity to climate change there for a moment, but its just more models.
I wonder what they will be saying about your models in 2032 ? 'Of course we didnt have the powerful machines or sophisticated models that we have now in '32, so it was a perfectly understandable mistake to make, wrecking the western economy, frightening half the world half to death. But at least we good intentions'

[BlasterBates]

More recently the IPCC models projected a 0.32C rise from 1990 to 2010. You might want to research how that panned out ...

The rise between 1920 and 1940 was about the same as the rise between 1980 and 2010 (source HADCRUT).

This is because of the PDO (Pacific decadal oscillation)

The temperature rises for 30 years, drops for 30 years and so on. Scientific evidence as outlined by Professor Easterbrook from Ice core analysis in Greenland, and Antarctica as well as glacier variations in North America and other parts of the world demonstrate this. The temperature has been static for about 10 years as the PDO has reversed into a cooling phase.

Also bear in mind we had a solar maximum, higher than at any time since records began. You might like to check out recent research on the impact of solar variation on global temperature.

Look out for some cooling in the next couple of years. Check out the NOAA forecast for 2011. It will be very cold.

The globe has actually been warming since the little ice age, and eventually will cool again.

[EternalOptimist]

Anyway pj,
the OP was referring to another cataclysmic event caused by humans, hyped by the green religion and politicos and eventually proved to be false by the evidence.
as the OP says, that 'wolf crying' hysteria has now become a laughing stock, the obvious inference being that the current situation will go the same way.

If it does, exactly how will you backtrack ? will you come out, stand tall and say 'ok I was wrong'

[lukemg]

1.Even if it is us, there is nothing you can do about it.
B. It’s caused by the burning of fossil fuels, these will run out in a time frame amounting to the blink of an eye in the life of the planet and from this point energy use will be essentially carbon-neutral – problem solved.

[BlasterBates]

Unreliable. Easterbrook is an emeritus professor of Geology, has never published in climate science and when it suits him, just makes stuff up.

That's not a scientific argument.

You mean he's a heretic

(The number of new national records in a year is itself a record and there are no new national cold records this year. The record in Pakistan was the hottest reliably measured temperature ever recorded on the continent of Asia.)

Nobody disputes that 2010 wasn't hot. Typical vacuous argument, temperature records broken, hardly surprising after the highest solar maximum ever recorded. It does take time to cool, and in any case what about 2008 was that hot. You constantly contradict yourself claiming on the one hand sharp cooling as a "natural wiggle" and sharp warming as evidence of global warming. 2010 was also a "wiggle". 2010 at best was the same as 1998, after 12 years you expect the record to be beaten by a significant margin, not be the same.

In any case you'll find numerous hottest years since the little ice age, it's normal in a several hundred year warming cycle.

You've completely ignored the evidence outlined from ice core measurements that shows temperature variations up and down over the last 1000. Dogma is not a scientific argument.

I very much doubt 2012 will be another record year, but that's far enough away that NASA can say it will be, for the climate conference, which in any case will be an "unmitigated disaster".

What sea level rise did Hansen (from NASA) predict in 1988?

check it out and then go to the beach and see if he was right.

The debate is not whether we've had warming, the debate is whether it is natural.

To answer this with proof of warming is vacuous.