Climate change

[PassedOut]

Koch brothers accidentally fund study that proves global warming

 

The latest global warming results confirm those from earlier, independent studies by scientists at NASA and elsewhere that came under fire from skeptics in an episode known as 'climategate'.

 

A new climate study shows that since the mid-1950s, global average temperatures over land have risen by 0.9 degrees Celsius (1.6 degrees Fahrenheit), confirming previous studies that have found a climate that has been warming – in fits and starts – since around 1900.

 

Most climate scientists attribute warming since the mid-1950, at least to some degree, to carbon dioxide emissions from human activities – burning coal, oil, and to a lesser extent gas, and from land-use changes.

 

The latest results mirror those from earlier, independent studies by scientists at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research in Britain, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

And now the smoke from Charlie Koch's ears will raise the temperature even more.

[Al_U_Card]

Koch brothers accidentally fund study that proves global warming

 

 

And now the smoke from Charlie Koch's ears will raise the temperature even more.

 

Which may end up being the largest anthropogenic component of warming.... ;)

 

Warming is one thing (cooling during periods of increasing [CO2] is another) which the temperature record demonstrates. Causes and not causative factors are the problem. :lol:

[mike777]

I still wait to see more studies that discuss the relationship between c02 concentration and temperature and that discuss how urgent the problem is.

 

 

 

If the problem is urgent then the economic solution will be a disaster for the planet.

[Al_U_Card]

I still wait to see more studies that discuss the relationship between c02 concentration and temperature and that discuss how urgent the problem is.

 

 

 

If the problem is urgent then the economic solution will be a disaster for the planet.

 

Taken from this cogent analysis of the statistics involved, BEST is not the appropriate modifier.

 

Technical but clearly why [CO2] is the least of our worries.

 

 

Accept that for the moment. The question is then why choose the 1950s as the comparator and not the 1940s when it was warmer? Possible answer: because using the 1950s emphasizes the change. But let’s not start on the politics, so never mind, and also ignore the hyper precision. Concentrate instead on the “+/- 0.033 C”, which we already know is not the uncertainty in the actual temperature but that of a model parameter.

If all the sources of over-certainty which I (and Keenan) mentioned were taken into account, my guess is that this uncertainty bound would at least double. That would make it at least +/- 0.066 C. OK, so what? It’s still small compared to the 8.849 C (interval 8.783 – 8.915 C; and for 2000-2009 it’s 9.678 – 9.842 C). Still a jump.

But if we added to that the uncertainty in the parameter so that our uncertainty bounds are on the actual temperature, we’d again have to multiply the bounds by 5 to 73. This makes the 1950-1959 bound at least 0.132, and the 2000-2009 at least 0.410. The intervals are then 8.519 – 9.179 C for the ’50s and 9.350 – 10.170 C for the oughts. Still a change, but one which is now far less certain.

Since the change is still “significant”, you might say “So what?” Glad you asked: Look at those bounds on the years before 1940, especially those prior to 1900. Applying the above changes pushes those bounds way out, which means we cannot tell with any level of certainty if we are warmer or cooler now then we were before 1940, and especially before 1900. Re-read that sentence, too, please.

And even if you want to be recalcitrant and insist on model perfection and you believe parameters are real, many of the uncertainty bounds before 1880 already cover many modern temperatures. The years around 1830 are already not “statistically different” than, say, 2008.

[PassedOut]

I still wait to see more studies...

Berkeley Earth Temperature Averaging Process

[luke warm]

carbon taxes will stem the tide (as it were)

[Al_U_Card]

Yeah, taxes usually help most situations that are out of our control, of questionable benefit or following someone else's agenda.... :blink:

[Al_U_Card]

The text of Matt Ridley's Angus Millar lecture at the RSA in Edinburgh.

 

He doesn't miss anything.

[PassedOut]

carbon taxes will stem the tide (as it were)

You might be right about that. Your carbon taxes might allow for more creative market solutions than would direct legal restrictions on emissions.

[luke warm]

You might be right about that. Your carbon taxes might allow for more creative market solutions than would direct legal restrictions on emissions.

right... it would aid the creation of more taxpayer funded green companies that could, in turn, go bankrupt... if a "green" company can make it, i.e. if it had a product that people want and charged a fair price for it, don't you think someone would have done it *without* the gov't's help?

[PassedOut]

right... it would aid the creation of more taxpayer funded green companies that could, in turn, go bankrupt... if a "green" company can make it, i.e. if it had a product that people want and charged a fair price for it, don't you think someone would have done it *without* the gov't's help?

As you endorsed a carbon tax to "stem the tide" of emissions, I suspect you intend to say that other energy sources would thereby become more competitive. That seems logical. Not sure you have the whole answer there though, but seems worth a try. Our grandchildren will have more than enough to handle as it is.

[Al_U_Card]

Once you eliminate the bogey-man of [CO2] from the proposal, that is the start of being able to respond in a salient manner to the OT proposal.

 

Since man definitely affects temperatures by urbanization, we could all go live in the country (Pol Pot's suggestion, not mine). But then, land-use changes also affect temperatures so we would have to go back to the trees....

 

Ideally, [CO2]'s potential warming effect of a degree C or so might just be worthwhile to help reduce extreme weather and increase arable land surface. Wetter is better. Coastline infrastructure notwithstanding, the Dutch did okay with sea-levels over the centuries and a beachfront property (EXCEPT Al Gore's place, as that should become an underwater monument to planetary largesse.) is a beachfront property whether in Miami or Atlanta. :D

 

Either way, the imminent (geologically-speaking) ice-age will be a much greater pre-occupation of our grand-children than any other climate-related phenomenon.

[blackshoe]

Keith Laumer wrote a novel (The Great Time Machine Hoax) in which he suggested that no community should be larger than 3000 people, and that no community's center should be closer than 100 miles to any other. I suppose that's one way to avoid "urbanization", not to mention large populations. But I doubt you could get anyone to abide by it.

[Al_U_Card]

More of the same, I suppose...

 

From "The air vent"

 

It comes from an anniversary gift, of sorts. More of the e-mails that were leaked from our climate-gate villains, confirming the machinations and skullduggery that they used and even complained about, amongst themselves!

 

Here is the download link for the zip file should you be so inclined.

 

My personal fave comes from Michael"I should have deleted all e-mails!" Mann:

 

<1485> Mann:

 

the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing the PR battle. That’s what

the site [Real Climate] is about.

[Al_U_Card]

Just what we need...

 

a treasure trove

 

a searchable database of the most recent release. Just click on search and type a keyword :)

[Cascade]

Just what we need...

 

a treasure trove

 

a searchable database of the most recent release. Just click on search and type a keyword :)

 

A commentary

 

Scientists Behaving Badly

[luke warm]

A commentary

 

Scientists Behaving Badly

from the article

 

In truth, virtually the entire warmist edifice is built around a small, tightly knit coterie of persons (one hesitates to refer to folks with so little respect for the scientific method as scientists) willing to falsify data and manipulate findings; or, to put it bluntly, to lie in order to push a political agenda not supported by empirical evidence. This is what made the original release of the Climategate e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia so valuable. They clearly identified the politicized core of climate watchers who were driving the entire warmist agenda.

it's long been known that "truth" isn't the most important thing in this debate

[Al_U_Card]

FOIA.org, the "person" behind the release of both CgI and CgII information has also left the remainder of the inculpatory evidence behind a security key. Clearly, the intention behind the first batch of technical e-mails was to concentrate on the science. This latest batch is all about the tribalism and dirty-tricks that were used to promote the CAGW meme.

 

There is a significant lack of clues relating the climate-science crowd to the IPCC and governmental/scientific/banking types. This is likely contained within the remainder of the files and may or may not get released, only time will tell. In the mean time, the wheels of science are inexorably rolling towards the revelation of just how bogus the whole CO2 scam has been.

 

Pollution and excess, both environmental and societal, have put us in the pickle that we find ourselves. Only clear-headed, accurate and fair adjudication of our real problems will resolve the situation. Getting rid of this and similar "do as we say or suffer the consequences" rhetoric is the only way to go, as slowly as may be needed. It is definitely a step in the right direction.

[mike777]

STOP please

 

JUst post studies that go over the relationship between c02 and tempatures..

 

 

We know, accept man made global warming....just tell us more....

 

 

IN the short run any solution is a disaster. That means the solution is a disaster. OTOH if we have 200 years..ok.....we got a chance.

 

--

 

 

As i have said it seems we just dont know at this point but the solution seems to be automation and innovation.

 

 

Not more regulations.

[PassedOut]

World on track for nearly 11-degree temperature rise

 

The chief economist for the International Energy Agency said Monday that current global energy consumption levels put the Earth on a trajectory to warm by 6 degrees Celsius (10.8 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels by 2100, an outcome he called “a catastrophe for all of us.”

But the catastrophe will be born by our children and grandchildren, so members of the irresponsible "me-generation" say things like "not more regulations."

[Al_U_Card]

World on track for nearly 11-degree temperature rise

 

 

But the catastrophe will be born by our children and grandchildren, so members of the irresponsible "me-generation" say things like "not more regulations."

 

Birol doesn't mention which of the climate models he references but as we have seen, all of Hansen's show global "warming" failing to keep pace (temperature-wise) with even his zero-emission scenario C!

 

Climate sensitivity (the temperature increase expected for a doubling of [CO2]) in the models is at least at the 4.5 deg. C average but lately, observations of data and subsequent analysis show that it is more likely less than 3 deg. C. Indeed the horrific "projections" are based on water vapour (clouds) having a magical doubling or tripling effect on the [CO2]/temperature relation. Happily, this too is being proved false.

 

We don't need to waste our money on extravagant and useless projects, as our children and their children will need all our resources to deal with real world problems. That we leave them something is better than being known as the generation that "Chicken-Littled" away our chance to address the real, current issues.

 

I am still grateful that the current cooling of the globe happened before the warmists got their crazy plans in place, as it would have been easy for them to find other reasons for keeping our cash flowing to them. Read those e-mails and know that the scam almost worked, had it not been for diligent and industrious individuals fighting for what was right and real.

[hrothgar]

I am still grateful that the current cooling of the globe happened before the warmists got their crazy plans in place, as it would have been easy for them to find other reasons for keeping our cash flowing to them. Read those e-mails and know that the scam almost worked, had it not been for diligent and industrious individuals fighting for what was right and real.

 

I am grateful that I have lived to see a world where everyone gets to pick and chose their own set of facts and where basic science has become so politically polarized.

[Al_U_Card]

I am grateful that I have lived to see a world where everyone gets to pick and chose their own set of facts and where basic science has become so politically polarized.

 

That certainly describes the body of work, efforts and subterfuges of Hansen, Mann, Jones et al. :o :D

[luke warm]

World on track for nearly 11-degree temperature rise

 

 

But the catastrophe will be born by our children and grandchildren, so members of the irresponsible "me-generation" say things like "not more regulations."

how do we stop it, assuming "it" exists?

[onoway]

how do we stop it, assuming "it" exists?

 

What would seem to be a major issue looming is the ability to harvest clean water. Aside from climate warming or not, access to water is increasingly becoming an issue. Even without a drought, supposedly many communities are drawing water from aquifers which do not easilly replenish from rain for one reason or another. So when those aquifers are drained....

 

There has been a lot of work done showing that a combination of bringing back plant diversity (trees esp) and actually working to make soils healthy has a profound effect on at least the local area climate. In fact, several people in places as diverse as India and the Midwest US have managed to bring dried up wells and creeks back to production with nothing more. Well, the guy in the midwest used cattle to promote plant growth, but no chemicals or fertilizers and no seed brought in. Others have done the same but with minor use of machines to make swales on contour for planting.

 

One big thing that would help a lot would be to stop clear cutting trees and that means in such places as Canada as well as the Amazon. Planting a monocrop of pine or anything else won't do it. Monocrops and healthy soil are very uneasy and difficult associates, if not actually antagonistic to each other; the goals of each are contradictory to the other.