Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Calliope]

Hoped you would spot that Calliope. Always makes sense to identify exactly what lies are being told by the various range of skeptics and outright deniers. I believe they take great pains to examine as many pseudo science "facts" as possible to enable students to understand scientific practice versus hokum.

Spoken like a true egoist.

And on the topic of changing reality check out how Spencer, Watts and Co dealt with the fact that Amercia had its warmest year on record in 2012.

No thanks. Not really interested. I never read your biased and verbose posts or links. I just cherry-pick for clangers.

 

[basilio]

Well there are are.

I actually do read and check up on most of the posts that are put up that challenge current climate change science. Always useful to understand another point of view. (In many cases the full story contradicts what the poster has tried to say but thats par for the course here)

Clearly Calliope you have no need to read anything else. You know it all...

 

[explod]

S I just cherry-pick for clangers.

And that is the measure of it ole Pal.

You could not really care less either way

 

[spooly74]

Always makes sense to identify exactly what lies are being told by the various range of skeptics and outright deniers.

Why. What harm are they doing to anyone?

My understanding is that climate models do reflect reality for previous data in a sufficiently demonstrable manner to the relevant scientific community, even though they are not perfect, and as such provide the best mechanism we currently have for predictions

On the whole, I don't have a problem with climate models, and generally agree with your general comment above
Currently though, all you hear about is a call to restrict temp under 2 degrees by 2010, or else...., based on modelling. Simply, thats 0.2 per decade. IIRC most of that heat was to occur in the first couple of decades this century. If thats the case, we need to start seeing massive increases in the avg global temp over the next 10-15 years, and that's just to hit the lower limit.

If CO2 causes warming then we're going to have warming. The best we can do now is plan to cope with that as best we can.

We know a tax or a trading scheme won't remove CO2.
Have you heard of any large bio or man-made engineering projects to remove excess CO2?
I'm sick of hearing what the scientists have to say. Lets hear from some engineers.

 

[basilio]

Well Spooly some interesting observations.

You ask what harm are skeptics and deniers doing with their lies? I would give them very large credit for stalling almost all effective action against reducing CO2 levels and the effect on our climate.

Ask yourself where would we be if the fossil fuel industry agreed that excessive CO2 emissions were dangerous and that they would be moving heaven and earth to develop non polluting energy sources or minimise their own emissions. For example what would have happened if in the 70's the tobacco industry had acknowledged that cigarettes were addictive and caused cancer and offered to voluntarily close up shop?

You can't easily tackle a problem when some of the most powerful organizations on the planet have a vested interest in denying the issue.

I'm not sure of your logic with regard to keeping global temperatures to a minimum increase. If you accept the models are accurate ( which you appear to ?) then wondering whether we get cooked in 30 years or 60 years or 90 years appears moot.

No one pretends the climate changes in lock step with CO2 emissions. There are other climatic factors at play and in any case the earth can warm considerably in the oceans, through ice melt while showing only a modest increase in average temperature - for a while. But inevitably the extra heat energy will drive average temperatures up.

With regard to solutions to removing CO2. As I said earlier while we have a core group of powerful people denying what is happening it is hard to see how things will change.

I believe you are being unfair about the effect a well constructed carbon tax would have on CO2 emissions. If one makes CO2 emitting energy more expensive than clean fuels the economic market place will move in that direction. It's business self interest at work.

As far as other schemes to remove CO2. They seem to be expensive and incapable of doing the job. And really wouldn't it be simpler to start by reducing the CO2 emissions in the first place ?

 

[Surly]

As far as other schemes to remove CO2. They seem to be expensive and incapable of doing the job. And really wouldn't it be simpler to start by reducing the CO2 emissions in the first place ?

Basilio,

Wouldn't it be fantastic if nature had invented a way of removing carbon from the air and locking it up in some way, that may also provide a further cooling and moderating effect on the climate

cheers
Surly

 

[explod]

Basilio,

Wouldn't it be fantastic if nature had invented a way of removing carbon from the air and locking it up in some way, that may also provide a further cooling and moderating effect on the climate

cheers
Surly

Nature did, it is called trees

and we need to plant them all back again and camp in the ones they want to chop down.

Why do you think I am a Greenie?

 

[Calliope]

. You know it all

Oh! The irony.

You mustn't give up, bas. I get a lot of laughs out of you and the faithful Plod. You remind me of the gallant knight, Don Quixote and the faithful Sancho Panza on a mission to save the world...but tilting at windmills.

 

[spooly74]

Well Spooly some interesting observations.

You ask what harm are skeptics and deniers doing with their lies? I would give them very large credit for stalling almost all effective action against reducing CO2 levels and the effect on our climate.

Ask yourself where would we be if the fossil fuel industry agreed that excessive CO2 emissions were dangerous and that they would be moving heaven and earth to develop non polluting energy sources or minimise their own emissions. For example what would have happened if in the 70's the tobacco industry had acknowledged that cigarettes were addictive and caused cancer and offered to voluntarily close up shop?

You can't easily tackle a problem when some of the most powerful organizations on the planet have a vested interest in denying the issue.

When its a case of policies on emissions reductions vs economic growth. The latter will prevail every time.
It's the Iron Law of Climate Policy.
Skeptics aren't stalling action, you just wish they were.

 

[basilio]

When its a case of policies on emissions reductions vs economic growth. The latter will prevail every time.
It's the Iron Law of Climate Policy.
Skeptics aren't stalling action, you just wish they were.

I think there is a lot of truth in your comment. In fact the current need to make and use more and more stuff regardless of actual need and the waste it entails is part of the problem of global warming.

My point was the power and vested interests of current fossil companies to keep using their products and to hold onto the value of their reserves. It is just unimaginable to them to see trillions of dollars of oil and coal reserves brought to nothing because we decide we cannot create more CO2. Essentially it is the issue of stranded assets.

That is why a well constructed Carbon Tax is a excellent tool to encourage non CO2 polluting energy production Vs coal/oil/gas based production. For example encouraging hydrogen based technologies.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2009/WaysAndMeans_20090225.pdf

 

[noco]

It would appear from the link below that the Global Warming Alarmist have been exaggerating their claim for years.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...rmist_scientist_admits_whoops_we_exaggerated/

 

[Some Dude]

It would appear from the link below that the Global Warming Alarmist have been exaggerating their claim for years.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...rmist_scientist_admits_whoops_we_exaggerated/

Really? What about the study that you read indicated that they were exaggerating?

Edit: And as usual, find the author and he says something very very different to what Bolt is implying.

Uncertainties about the overall results of feedback mechanisms make it very difficult to predict just how much of the rise in Earth's mean surface temperature is due to manmade emissions. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) the climate sensitivity to doubled atmospheric CO2 levels is probably between 2 °C and 4.5 °C, with the most probable being 3 °C of warming.
In the Norwegian project, however, researchers have arrived at an estimate of 1.9 °C as the most likely level of warming.

...

Terje Berntsen emphasises that his project's findings must not be construed as an excuse for complacency in addressing human-induced global warming. The results do indicate, however, that it may be more within our reach to achieve global climate targets than previously thought.
Regardless, the fight cannot be won without implementing substantial climate measures within the next few years.

I wonder why people don't apply these terms like exaggerate to Bolt? It's the most peculiar phenomenon.

 

[Smurf1976]

I believe you are being unfair about the effect a well constructed carbon tax would have on CO2 emissions. If one makes CO2 emitting energy more expensive than clean fuels the economic market place will move in that direction. It's business self interest at work.

Agreed in principle but the tax we have today is anything but well constructed. That problem, rather than the tax itself, is I think the underlying objection many have to it.

What are the biggest problems with it? Firstly it applies at a markedly different rate depending on the location of the point source of the CO2 being emitted. Secondly it is open to speculation and manipulation, thus resulting in a wealth transfer unassociated with actual emissions reduction.

Fix those two points and I have no objection to it.

 

[MrBurns]

Core of my heart, my country!
Land of the Rainbow Gold,
For flood and fire and famine,
She pays us back threefold-
Over the thirsty paddocks,
Watch, after many days,
The filmy veil of greenness
That thickens as we gaze.

My Country
by
Dorothea Mackellar
(1885 - 1968)

So whats new except for climate scientists milkng peoples fear for financial gain ?

 

[sydboy007]

My Country
by
Dorothea Mackellar
(1885 - 1968)

So whats new except for climate scientists milkng peoples fear for financial gain ?

How often do we have to have abnormally hot days before it's normal?

I think the below graph shows quite clearly what hs been happening over the last 50 years - at least in the Sydney area

 

[basilio]

Follow up from Nicolas Stern who produced the 2008 Stern review on Climate Change.

Nicholas Stern: 'I got it wrong on climate change

http://sustainablesecurity.blogspot...te.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"As the facts change so do thinking peoples views"

 

[explod]

Follow up from Nicolas Stern who produced the 2008 Stern review on Climate Change.



http://sustainablesecurity.blogspot...te.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"As the facts change so do thinking peoples views"

Thanks for posting up Bas.

The problem we have is that it does not exist in the mind of people unless it is proven beyond doubt and the evidence of the destruction is clear and happening. Like that of a bush fire, or the dreadful floods we are witnessing now, when it can be seen in front of you it is then far too late.

 

[MrBurns]

Chinese smog chokes Japan

Smog from China is now drifting over parts of Japan, triggering health warnings for the young and sick.

Japanese media has been saturated with coverage of the thick, choking smog blanketing Beijing and other Chinese cities in recent days.

News programs have also broadcast maps showing the pollution being pushed west by the winds towards southern Japan.

Japanese health experts are warning that people with respiratory problems and small children are susceptible to the smog, which is worst on the southern island of Kyushu.

The website of Japan's environment minister has been choked with users logging on to monitor the level of pollution heading their way.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-05/chinese-smog-chokes-japan/4500760

Lets make sure we pay more tax and tell Granny to turn her heater off to stop all this

 

[sails]

It's been nice weather here on the Gold Coast. Funny how this thread goes quiet when the weather completes a little heatwave and goes back to more comfortable temperatures (as it has been doing for all of my life time).

Are the warmists amongst us waiting for the next normal heatwave to hit so they can once again blast us with their scaremongering tactics?

 

[burglar]

... Are the warmists amongst us waiting for the next normal heatwave to hit ...

Not just normal heatwaves but also cold snaps, storm activity or any unseasonal weather.