Arctic ice melting at 'amazing' speed

[Scoobos]

If any of this warming nonsense was true, the answer would not be to save children but to prevent their birth. When the answer is to seriously reduce the population of the planet I will take it seriously, till then it is just a way to tax gullible sheep further.

So its all about children is it?

Numpty - It's about biodiversity, we rely on a food chain you know.

[escapeUK]

So its all about children is it?

Numpty - It's about biodiversity, we rely on a food chain you know.

No its not about children, its about humans. Too many of them. If there were 25% less people would there still be a problem? What about 50%? Lets try it and see.

[doodab]

If there were 25% less people would there still be a problem? What about 50%? Lets try it and see.

That's not a very practical experiment is it?

[escapeUK]

That's not a very practical experiment is it?

Is your alternative to let the population continue exponentially growing and see how bad that makes life, while simultaneously recycling a few tins and using your own bags in the supermarket?

It will be sorted. Either a war or a super pandemic will cut the population. Otherwise in the coming century the folly of worrying about was that planet getting a few degrees hotter while allowing the population to increase to such an extent that it was impossible to feed and water them all will be laughed at by historians.

[doodab]

Is your alternative to let the population continue exponentially growing and see how bad that makes life, while simultaneously recycling a few tins and using your own bags in the supermarket? It will be sorted. Either a war or a super pandemic will cut the population. Otherwise in the coming century the folly of worrying about was that planet getting a few degrees hotter while allowing the population to increase to such an extent that it was impossible to feed and water them all will be laughed at by historians.

Disposing of 3.5 billion bodies will present it's own challenges, and that will only forestall the inevitable.

It may also be worth considering that no war or pandemic in history has managed to kill 25% of the global population. Even 10% would be pushing it.

[pjclarke]

Scoobos you need to read the delinquent teenager by an ipcc insider, donna laframboise

Now you're having a laff. Laframboise is a journalist, feminist and her degree is in women's studies and is not affiliated to the IPCC in any way. You can read the first 7 chapters on Amazon US. Which I've done. I won't be purchasing the whole 'expose'. Here's a mini-review I wrote based on those:

Oh dear. No doubt this will garner plenty of 5* reviews from those predisposed to disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence, but based on the preview, this does not qualify as investigative journalism as the term is understood, which has a duty to consider all the evidence, not just cherry-pick and distort those elements that suit a particular narrative.

For example, Donna wants us to believe that the IPCC excluded world authorities in certain fields for idealogical reasons, and gives us a total of three examples, two of which are William Gray on hurricanes and Nils-Axel Mohner on sea level. Of Morner she correctly states that he was president of a distinguished Commission on sea level changes, but adds that "there is a disparity between what genuine sea level specialists think and what those who write IPCC reports believe."

This is a lie. The reality is that Morner's ideas have been widely discredited and the Commission of which he was president (INQUA) felt constrained to write this to the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences:-

"I am writing to inform you that Dr. Mörner has misrepresented his position with INQUA. Dr. Mörner was President of the Commission on Sea Level Change until July 2003, but the commission was terminated at that time during a reorganization of the commission structure of INQUA. Dr. Mörner currently has no formal position in INQUA, and I am distressed that he continues to represent himself in his former capacity. Further, INQUA, which is an umbrella organization for hundreds of researchers knowledgeable about past climate, (INQUA) does not subscribe to Mörner’s position on climate change. Nearly all of these researchers agree that humans are modifying Earth’s climate, a position diametrically opposed to Dr. Mörner’s point of view."

You'd think a genuine 'investigative journalist' (the above is available via wiki) might have slipped in this nugget, no?

Similarly, Gray's global warming research has been dismissed as substandard by his peers, you can read a critique here : RealClimate: Gray and Muddy Thinking about Global Warming

Laframboise does not seem to consider the possibility that the IPCC failed to include her 'people you'd expect to find at the heart of the organisation' not because they were contrarian, not because thet have retired from academic life (Mohner and Gray are in their seventies & eighties respectively), but because they've gone nuts.

I notice a chapter entitled The Peer Review Fairy tale. I haven't read it but I speculate it is a rehash of her deeply dishonest 'survey' of the number of peer-reviewed references in the reports. This made crass errors, for example categorising a book chapter as not peer-reviewed even though it was an exact reprint of a widely-cited and refereed journal article, dismissed the numerous self-cites to previous IPCC reports as 'non-reviewed' even though these are some of the most reviewed documents on the planet and counting references that could never have been peer-reviewed (e.g. a quote from Sir Isaac Newton's diary, research by Agassiz etc) towards the non-peer reviewed total, to get her numbers up!

Not the most reliable or impartial author, then. I read the seven chapters available on Amazon preview and while it contains the logical fallacy that a Greenpeace or WWF member cannot at the same time be a good scientist, it doesn't include the bit where she shows how the IPCC science is mistaken. Presumably that comes later on?

[NickFitz]

The North Pole, 1958

No it isn't. USS Skate didn't surface at the North Pole in August 1958, which is when that phoo was taken.

[pjclarke]

If you want you can just read the IAC report which was commissioned by the UN and come to your own conclusions

For those without the time or inclination to read 123 pages, here is the conclusion ...

The Committee concludes that the IPCC assessment process has been
successful overall and has served society well. The commitment of many
thousands of the world’s leading scientists and other experts to the assessment
process and to the communication of the nature of our understanding
of the changing climate, its impacts, and possible adaptation and
mitigation strategies is a considerable achievement in its own right.
Similarly, the sustained commitment of governments to the process and
their buy-in to the results is a mark of a successful assessment. Through
its unique partnership between scientists and governments, the IPCC has
heightened public awareness of climate change, raised the level of scientific
debate, and influenced the science agendas of many nations. However,
despite these successes, some fundamental changes to the process and the
management structure are essential, as discussed in this report and
summarized below.

Not quite the picture that the selective and highly-edited extracts paint is it?

[Scoobos]

No it isn't. USS Skate didn't surface at the North Pole in August 1958, which is when that phoo was taken.

Don't waste your breath, I'm tired of seeing that photo......

From people who love to present Wikipedia documents as fact in other threads, why not check it on Wikipedia?

Description


English: USS Skate (SSN-578) (Date and Location uncertain)

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to pjclarke again.

[escapeUK]

Disposing of 3.5 billion bodies will present it's own challenges, and that will only forestall the inevitable.

It may also be worth considering that no war or pandemic in history has managed to kill 25% of the global population. Even 10% would be pushing it.

But we arent living in the past. Population is now concentrated in densely packed cities, that are unable to support their own food needs and people routinely jet around the world. A pandemic would spread far quicker than has ever been possible, food, energy would soon run out / fail. Shortly people would start to fight over the limited supplies and law and order would collapse.