Posted on 09/19/2017 6:58:57 PM PDT by bitt
Climate alarmists have finally admitted that they’ve got it wrong on global warming. This is the inescapable conclusion of a landmark paper, published in Nature Geoscience, which finally admits that the computer models have overstated the impact of carbon dioxide on climate and that the planet is warming more slowly than predicted.
The paper – titled Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C – concedes that it is now almost impossible that the doomsday predictions made in the last IPCC Assessment Report of 1.5 degrees C warming above pre-industrial levels by 2022 will come true.
In order for that to happen, temperatures would have to rise by a massive 0.5 degrees C in five years.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
When talking to a liberal, look the opposite or what they are claiming and you will likely find the truth.
Dudden matter. The pope dude says it is, thus the libbertards will continue to say it is and continue to make millions off it, IE: Algore will. The Weather Channel will continue to hype it. It will not go away.
They didn’t get it wrong - they were lying.
Here in the western US , the USDA Forest Service has a policy of “let it burn” when it comes to forest fires. In oregon, they let over 75 fires burn themselves out and only allowed fire suppression when threatening lives or property. The smoke covered massive areas covering several states and many fires burned for 3 months. Not until late august when it got completly out of hand did they even roll out assets to the perimeter. They have the means and methods to stop all of these fires. Utter devastation of timber resources and sensitive diverse species wildlife habitat for the sake of some idiotic ENVIRONMENTALIST “theories”. These people are absolute IDIOTS
Then , when all of the forests are gone, and coverted into sterile deserts or home depot 2x4 farms, they will say “look what climate change did” .....Freaking Idiocracy on parade
...and they have been idiots for some time. These enviro-bums should all be fired. Losers. Fools. Haters of forests and wildlife.
I got into a go around with a typical liberal nutcase a few years ago about CO2 being labeled a pollutant. I told him nothing lives without it and he went nuts, yelling that you can die if you get too much of it. I replied that you can also drink enough water to kill you, does that mean water is a pollutant? Is our water supply polluted with water? These people have brains, they just refuse to use them.
Does the likelihood that temperatures will NOT rise to the predicted level by 2022 mean that they will not rise to that level a decade or two later? I am very worried about the very warm oceans that are spawning such a devastating swarm of hurricanes this year. I am particularly worried since my son and family are currently living in Puerto Rico. They had moved from Miami, so at least they are higher above sea level. Will we continue to have such warm oceans? What, if any, conditions in North Africa have influenced the current hurricane formation?
Regarding Paris agreement, we are in until 2020. I am not sure if we should get out of a world wide agreement, but we should definitely negotiate better options. We may have more influence inside it than on the outside.
All I know is that if it wasn’t for global warming, the town I grew up in would still be under a mile of ice.
From my point of view (a Ph.D. scientist in an mainly unrelated field), climatology is a science, but “climate science” is a lot like astrology was back when anyone with any education took it seriously.
Oh, those CO2 vs. warming models!!!! Kind of fishy, aren’t they?
You are making the assumption that warm oceans automatically mean a devastating hurricane season.
Normally wind shear is a huge enemy of these storms. I have not heard one forecaster talking about wind shear being a threat to the recent storms. The waters after the summer season are always warm, that is just one factor to building a super hurricane.
Does the likelihood that temperatures will NOT rise to the predicted level by 2022 mean that they will not rise to that level a decade or two later?
The models have a very high dependence on CO2 levels. Since CO2 levels have risen and temperatures have not risen as predicted, it means the models are wrong. There are other researchers that think CO2 levels rise because temperatures increased and were released from the environment. In other words, temperature increase caused the CO2 levels to increase, not the opposite.
Fortunately President Trump gets it and is not going to let the globalists steal $Billions from the US.
It means, the society is on the road to recovery from the politically motivated garbage that is anthropogenic warming. The climate is 100 percent natural 100 percent of the time.
Most recently, the LIE that the ocean depths were “hiding” the warming was revived by the global warming demagogues. That particular bogus claim was actually studied a decade or so ago, and it was found, not surprisingly, that the oceans not only weren’t warming at depth, they got colder and more briny with depth, you know, exactly in accordance with actual physics, rather than the imaginary kind spewed out by leftists. The oceans can’t warm at depth, unless there’s a volcano right there, and that’s a spot source. That hasn’t stopped the global warming LIARS from trotting that out again. They do that because they are LIARS.
The Paris agreement isn’t a worldwide agreement, it’s a political document that isn’t based on science in any way, shape, or form. We will have more influence if we tell the other signatories to shove it up their asses, and can do that just fine from outside.
I had not heard anything about the ocean depths “hiding” the warming. However, my understanding is that a possible danger of surface warming is that if arctic ocean freezing is reduced, then there will be less fresh water taken out of the ocean as ice and therefore less more briny water to sink to the bottom and maintain the Gulf Stream circulation. If the Gulf Stream circulation fails, England and northern Europe would be in big trouble. Notice, I said “if”; at any rate, something to keep an eye on.
Around year 2000 David Letterman included some fear-mongering comment about how the ice at the north pole had melted in the summer, for the first time in 30 million years, citing an agitprop piece in the NY Slimes. He included that in his monologue for four straight nights. On Friday, he finally noted that there was a retraction of sorts in the Slimes, noting that the melting is something that happens every year. The the Slimes included the unrebutted agitprop piece in their Sunday supplement. It’s nonsense.
I decided to try to find out more about this 2022 prediction. Here is what I found at the IPPC site. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ Reading this I get the impression that a report is being prepared due 2018 on the “impacts of global warming of 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels.” If that date is correct, then the “settled science” is still in the process of being settled. Any other thoughts or interpretations???
“In its decision on the adoption of the Paris Agreement, the Conference of Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris, France (30 November to 11 December 2015), invited the IPCC to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways.
At its 43rd Session (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the invitation from the UNFCCC to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty.
The scoping meeting that prepared the draft outline for the Special Report was held on 15 – 18 August 2016 in Geneva, Switzerland.
During its 44th Session (Bangkok, Thailand, 17-20 October 2016), the Panel approved the outline of Global Warming of 1.5ºC, an IPCC Special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.
The Special Report is being developed under the joint scientific leadership of Working Groups I, II and III with support from WGI TSU.
Expert Review of the First Order Draft
The Expert Review of the First Order Draft of the IPCC Special Report Global Warming of 1.5 °C will run from 31 July to 24 September 2017. Registration closed on 17 September 2017.
Information Note
Flyer
More Information
Press release
True, ice in the polar sea has been melting on a regular basis in the summer. However, the extent and duration of melting has grown to the degree that allows the possibility of commercial traffic from Atlantic to Pacific, and competition with Russia over undersea ocean floor resources. If you click the link in my Comment #75, you will see the 4 bottom lines that are at my comment, and you can click them for more information, some of which (from “press release”) I have quoted below. The final report is due in Sept. 2018.
“The quality of the IPCC assessment strongly depends on the contribution made by Expert Reviewers from all over the world”, says Valérie Masson-Delmotte, Co-Chair of Working Group I. “We solicit experts to join us in this review effort, including early career scientists, as an opportunity to participate in the IPCC process and contribute directly to the preparation of the special report.”
All IPCC reports go through two stages of formal review. The first draft is evaluated by Expert Reviewers, before a second draft is reviewed by both governments and experts for final assessment. This comprehensive review process ensures that IPCC reports cover the most up to date scientific, technical and socio-economic findings, and are representative of a broad range of independent expertise from developed and developing countries.”
P4L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.