Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

My emphasis. Italics indicate my comment.
1 posted on 04/02/2002 3:32:39 PM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Howlin
Hey! Look here! Yet another thing that "Gore would have also done!" Snort!
2 posted on 04/02/2002 3:35:34 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
"Chief Scientist of the World Bank" sure sounds like an oxymoron. And why does the World Bank need an atmospheric scientist in the first place?

Anyway, can his @ss before its too late.
3 posted on 04/02/2002 3:39:45 PM PST by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
The current upward trend in global temperatures began in 1700, after three centuries or so of unusually low temperatures. It is cooler now than it was 1000 years ago; it was even warmer than that 3000 years ago. The religious dogma that Sinful Man is Ruining Gaia with His Evil Industry is unsupported and unsupportable.

Barf Alert

4 posted on 04/02/2002 3:41:03 PM PST by Chairman Fred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
No doubt we "could" change the climate, the question is are we? Would we have to burn all of Saudi's oil at once, or are what we doing now changing the climate. I've seen nothing convincing that we are.
5 posted on 04/02/2002 3:41:18 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry;cogitator
Bump!
7 posted on 04/02/2002 3:44:20 PM PST by alaskanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
Just because someone's a "scientist" doesn't mean they know anything. And it certainly doesn't mean they are objective and unbiased.

I would nominate a bum from State Street because that would mean there's one less bum on State Street.

Most bums are delusional so I'm sure the one nominated could do a great job with the fake Global Warming(TM) problem.

8 posted on 04/02/2002 3:45:39 PM PST by Duke Nukum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
All I can say is "thank god for Global Warming". Saved us from a horribly chilly fate.
10 posted on 04/02/2002 3:55:02 PM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
Yeah, but Newsweek just announced the world is cooling.

I'm sooo confused now.

12 posted on 04/02/2002 4:17:27 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
"Dr. Watson is an outspoken advocate of the idea that human actions — mainly burning oil and coal — are contributing to global warming and must be changed to avert environmental upheavals."

The average temp. of the Earth is 18oC. The max temp rise at the current rate of CO2 increase is 1.8oC, in 2100. That's the limit, it's impossible to go beyond that temp rise. In fact the sun seems to be heating up and that's the real cause of the observed Earth temp rise. There is no disaster pending. These folks need to limit their projections and computer outputs to the limits placed by reality. A 1.8oC rise is a 0.6% increase in global energy in the year 2100 and that assumes the Earth itself doesn't suck up the heat. That's an atmospheric temp rise only.

The real consequences of the greenhouse gas increase are insignificant and absolutely don't warrent reducing the world to a socialist, stone age serfdom. Folks in the free market will have plenty of time to arrange for other energy sources to replace the fossil fuels that are presently used. There is no catastrophy pending as these folks claim. Their sole purpose is to play Sim Earth and control world economies.

13 posted on 04/02/2002 4:19:18 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
Abolishing the IPCC would be the best policy. It is no longer needed.
14 posted on 04/02/2002 4:24:44 PM PST by Number_Cruncher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry

The Problem with getting your News from the New York Times is they only tell you what these Liberals think you should be told "all the news that fits" their Liberal agenda ... they forget the rest of the story

"Global Warming: Watson Indulges in Scare Tactics... Again

... Mind you, Watson is the same scientist who, in 1992, predicted an imminent ozone hole in the Northern Hemisphere. You remember the event; then-Senator and soon-to-be Vice President Gore called it "an ozone hole over Kennebunkport" (former-President George Bush's summer compound). Watson's (and Gore's) purpose was to stampede the U.S. Senate into a mandate that would reduce chlorofluorocarbon refrigerants. They succeeded, even though the ozone hole never appeared. "

This is Watson's second go at buffaloing a Bush Administration. Big Media's eagerness to go along is breathtaking. The January 23 edition of The Washington Post put this particular global warming story above the fold on its front page! The play could have been bigger only were it in the upper left-hand corner rather than the right.

A model of a model Neither the Post nor Watson mentions that this forecast of extreme warming is the result of a computer model. And not just any model, either. It is a product of the most extreme climate model run under the most extreme set of future emission scenarios. In other words, it's not a model based upon present trends; it's a model of a model! Putting a fine point on it, this particular result was produced by one (that's right, one) of 245 models the modelers ran.

In the backrooms at science meetings, the technique Watson and the IPCC have used in this instance is derided as a "toy model." This is because it treats the world largely as a uniform entity, one devoid of ocean currents, without mountains, and with no thunderstorms. Ocean currents, mountains, and thunderstorms just happen to be the three things that are the major movers of heat around our planet. They generally keep the Earth's surface temperature cooler than it otherwise would be.

It's not that there weren't other computer models available. There are. There were nearly 20 different sophisticated, but still flawed, models tested in the IPCC's TAR called general circulation climate models (GCMs). If Watson were forthcoming, he would have pointed out that the average for those models was a rise of only about 3.8°F--or some 2.75 times less than the extreme value Watson and the Post trumpet."

This is from: Global Warming: Watson Indulges in Scare Tactics... Again

It is a good thing the Bush administration will try to get a biased agitator out of harms way and seek slightly better balance in the IPCC.

15 posted on 04/02/2002 4:29:37 PM PST by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
your screen name gives your comment. Leave FR.
18 posted on 04/02/2002 4:59:07 PM PST by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry;UN_List
I have a better solution - abolish the whole panel. Oops, it's a U.N. panel. Well then get out of the U.N.

UN_List: for United Nations articles. 

Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

Don't forget:


23 posted on 04/02/2002 5:33:27 PM PST by RippleFire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
The panel's assessments of climate change underpinned negotiations leading to two climate treaties, the latest of them the Kyoto Protocol, which calls for cuts in emissions of heat-trapping gases. President Bush rejected it a year ago.
Just a reminder to all the FReepers here who think Bush isn't conservative enough to be our Republican President. If Goofy the Goron was now sittin'n'shittin' in the whitehouse, this terribly stupid, terribly harmful, terribly counterproductive protocol --- this Kyoto monstrosity --- would by now bear the signature of the President of the United States.

For that reason alone --- if for no other --- we should all rejoice that Bush is the president. We truly did dodge a bullet on this issue.

28 posted on 04/02/2002 7:21:31 PM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: liberallarry
Wasn't Dr. Watson the one who stabbed Bush Sr. in the back in Brazil, then later bragged about it?
38 posted on 04/03/2002 6:16:39 AM PST by Frumious Bandersnatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson