Warmist Evangelical Group: Climate Change Is A ‘Pro-Life’ Issue
…UN IPCC Lead Author Dr. Richard Tol admits no global warming for 17 years – Rips bias in IPCC – UN’s ‘inbuilt alarmism made me step down’ – ‘By the time the report was finished, however, it hadn’t warmed for 17 years’
All three show things are seriously amiss – although not necessarily with the climate itself. The final installment, to be published in September will further underline the need to reform the IPCC.
The IPCC has three working groups, each producing its own report. Working Group I, focusing on climate change itself, released its findings last September. Compared to the previous report, of 2007, it quietly revised downwards its estimate of eventual global warming.
The first rule of climate policy should be: do no harm to economic growth. But the IPCC was asked to focus on the risks of climate change alone, and those who volunteered to be its authors eagerly obliged.
The IPCC became less pessimistic about climate change, although its press release would not tell you so.
The report also illustrates just how outmoded the IPCC has become since it was founded in 1988. Its reports are written over a period of three years, and finished months before publication.
When preparations started on AR5, the world hadn’t warmed for 13 years. That is a bit odd, if you believe the models, but not odd enough to merit a lot of attention.
By the time the report was finished, however, it hadn’t warmed for 17 years. That is decidedly odd, but hard to accommodate in a near-final draft that has been through three rounds of review.
After the report was finalized, but before it was published, a number of papers appeared with hypotheses about the pause in warming. AR5 was out of date before it was released.
The IPCC model – every six years a big splash of climate analysis – is broken.
Working Group 2, published in March, and focusing on the impacts of climate change, had a different problem. It lies at the heart of the previous IPCC controversy. The scientific literature now acknowledges that many of the more worrying impacts of climate change are in fact symptoms of social mismanagement and underdevelopment.
The first rule of climate policy should be: do no harm to economic growth. But the IPCC was asked to focus on the risks of climate change alone, and those who volunteered to be its authors eagerly obliged. There is even a groundbreaking section on emerging risks.
The first paper on an issue is always dramatic. That is the only way to get something onto the scientific agenda. Follow-up papers then pooh-pooh the initial drama. …
Report: Global warming threatens more deadly Everest-like avalanches
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/20/nepal-climatechange-glaciers-idUSL3N0O60UX20140520…
Gov. Brown: California At ‘Epicenter’ Of Climate Change
…Sec. Of State John Kerry: If We’re Wrong on Climate Change, ‘What’s the Worst That Can Happen?’
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/kerry-if-were-wrong-climate-change-whats-worst-can-happen_793392.html…
THE IDEAL CLIMATE CITIZEN? NORTH Korea – UK Guardian: ‘North Korea: An Unlikely Champion in the Fight Against Climate Change’
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/the-ideal-climate-citizen-north-korea.php…
Antarctic Sea-Ice Coverage Continues Breaking Records: ‘Hits 3.5 million square miles in April— the largest on record’
Antarctic Sea-Ice Coverage Continues Breaking Records
http://iceagenow.info/2014/05/antarctic-sea-ice-coverage-continues-breaking-records/
Sea-ice coverage grew about 43,500 square miles per day in Antarctica this summer, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSDC). April 2014 beat the previous sea-ice coverage record from April 2008 by a whopping 124,000 square miles.
In fact, Antarctic sea ice coverage hit 3.5 million square miles in April— the largest on record.
One-hundred-and-twenty-four-thousand miles! That’s bigger than Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Maryland combined, with enough room left over for an additional 184 Manhattans.
And it’s not over. “Record levels continue to be set in early May,” reports the NSDC. Sea ice levels have been “significantly above” satellite data averages for 16 consecutive months.
If a chunk of ice the size of Manhattan breaks off of a glacier, the worldwide media wrings its collective hands. But if sea-ice coverage grows by the size of seven states plus 184 Manhattans, you hear nary a word.
I wonder why that is?
http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/12/global-cooling-antarctic-sea-ice-coverage-continues-to-break-records/#ixzz32Cdu0KsE
Thanks to Jason Cragg for this link…
Analysis: ‘BOTTOM FALLING OUT OF THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR DANGEROUS HUMAN-CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE’
BOTTOM FALLING OUT OF THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR DANGEROUS HUMAN-CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE
May 20, 2014: “Corbella: Pause in global warming upsets religious believers”, by Licia Corbella, columnist and the editorial page editor, Calgary Herald, Calgary, Alberta. The presentation by Professor McKitrick was delivered at the Friends of Science 11th Annual Luncheon on May 13, 2014.
“This is the real issue,” says McKitrick. “At the point when the modelers could no longer peek at the answer, they started getting it wrong. Significantly wrong.”
Between 1990 and 2014, CO2 levels increased by 13 per cent. The climate models all agree on what should have happened, which is why the climate religionists at the CRU wanted to cook the books to “hide the decline.”
Fully 111 out of 114 models touted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicted too much warming.
The models predicted warming of 0.21 C per decade — which is more than four times the actual observed level.
As Hans von Storch of the Institute of Coastal Sciences in Germany stated recently: “If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models. A 20-year pause in global warming does not occur in a single modelled scenario,” said von Storch, a renowned “consensus” climate scientist.
Indeed, last year, von Storch said: “We’re facing a puzzle. Recent CO2 emissions have actually risen even more steeply than we feared. As a result, according to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius over the past 10 years. That hasn’t happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius — a value very close to zero.”
Read whole piece by Ms. Corbella.
Read Friends of Science news release advertising this presentation.
Read Friends of Science news release after the event.…
Big-Green have more money than Big-Oil but the media are blind to it.
Big-Green have more money than Big-Oil but the media are blind to it.
Finally, some coverage of the massive amount of money pumping the Big-Green agenda. What is really so remarkable about this is that skeptics are winning, despite the fact that the greens have almost all the institutional, academic, government, and big-media support, and far, far more money. All we have is truth and wits. The Washington Examiner Mainstream media don’t know Big Green has deeper pockets than Big Oil Ron Arnold Mainstream reporters appear not to be aware of the component parts that comprise Big Green: environmentalist membership groups, nonprofit law firms, nonprofit real estate trusts (The Nature Conservancy alone holds $6 billion in assets), wealthy foundations giving prescriptive grants, and agenda-making cartels such as the 200-plus member Environmental Grantmakers Association. They each play a major socio-political role. Seeing Big-Green funding means taking a broader view of the money trail: Invisible fact: the environmental movement is a mature, highly developed network with top leadership stewarding a vast institutional memory, a fiercely loyal cadre of competent social and political operatives, and millions of high-demographic members ready to be mobilized as needed. That membership base is a built-in free public relations machine responsive […]Rating: 9.6/10 (32 votes cast)…
‘John Cook’s 97% consensus data is so good his University will sue you if you discuss it’
John Cook’s consensus data is so good his Uni will sue you if you discuss it
UPDATE: After I wrote this Brandon published the letter in full and raised some provocative questions. (See below) —————————— What bad news for The University of Queensland. Their entire legal staff were on holiday at the same time and this eminent university was protected only by a Law & Society 101 student who staffed the overnight service of FreeLegalAidOnline. A mockfest is ensuing across the Internet. It is so unfair. A year ago John Cook published another 97% study (the magic number that all consensuses must find). It was published under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (see Anthony Watts view). Cook’s work is obviously impeccable (except for the part about 97% being really 0.3%), but evidently it uses a special new kind of “open data”. The exact date and time each anonymized reviewer reviewed a sacred scientific abstract is commercial and must be kept secret. These volunteer reviewers allegedly stand to, er … lose a lot of money if that data is revealed (they won’t be employed again for no money?). Such is the importance of this that the University of Queensland left the data on secret-secret forum protected by no passwords and then put urls to […]Rating: 9.3/10 (48 votes cast)…