Climate change is UN-led hoax to create 'new world order' – Australian PM's adviser

yeah... so the models have trouble going 5 days out in areas with frequent weather change, but, you think climate model can go out decades to hundreds of years. And you still think that even though most of the agw nutter groups admit the models need to give more weight to sun and tides?

The scientists told us the models have now failed... you have no science showing man made co2 causes warming.
 
jem said:
yeah... so the models have trouble going 5 days out in areas with frequent weather change, but, you think climate model can go out decades to hundreds of years. And you still think that even though most of the agw nutter groups admit the models need to give more weight to sun and tides?

The scientists told us the models have now failed... you have no science showing man made co2 causes warming.
More...


Have you come up with ONE climate scientist that denies AGW like I asked for? Have you answered if CO2 is a greenhouse gas?
 
futurecurrents said:
Have you come up with ONE climate scientist that denies AGW like I asked for? Have you answered if CO2 is a greenhouse gas?
More...

FC is just trolling again. His definition of a"climate scientist" only includes the 100 or so loud AGW alarmists who take large grants from the government to fund their "studies". Any scientist who is a skeptic such as Judith Curry (who is the chair at the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology) does not count as a "climate scientist" according to FC despite her many papers and accomplishments.

How many times is futurecurrents going to ask if CO2 is a greenhouse gas? He seems very confused if CO2 is a greenhouse gas - despite everyone trying to explain it to him regularly. He must be dense.
 
wow... here scientists speculate.... greenhouse gases also cause cooling... just like I was speculating would happen.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...-have-caused-an-ice-age-claim-scientists.html

Researchers at the University of Birmingham found that 630 million years ago the earth had a warm atmosphere full of carbon dioxide but was completely covered with ice.

The scientists studied limestone rocks and found evidence that large amounts of greenhouse gas coincided with a prolonged period of freezing temperatures.

Such glaciation could happen again if global warming is not curbed, the university's school of geography, earth and environmental sciences warned.

While pollution in the air is thought to trap the sun's heat in the atmosphere, causing the planet to heat up, this new research suggests it could also have the opposite effect reflecting rays back into space.

This effect would be magnified by other forms of pollution in the earth's atmosphere such as particles of sulphate pumped into the air through industrial pollution or volcanic activity and could create ice age conditions once more, the scientists said.

  • Dr Ian Fairchild, lead investigator, said: "We came up with an independent test of a theory that the earth, like a baked Alaska pudding, was once hot on the outside, surrounding a cold, icy surface.

"It happened naturally in the past, but the wrong use of technology could make it happen again."

The limestones studied were collected in Svalbard in the Arctic Ocean, which is covered in ice and snow.
 
now this seems to be a agw nutter site... but even they admit there are scientists who doubt agw nutter beliefs.


http://ossfoundation.us/projects/en...s/31000-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence


31,000 scientists say "no convincing evidence".
31,000 scientists reject global warming and say "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause global warming? But polls show that of scientists working in the field of climate science, and publishing papers on the topic: 97% of the climate scientists surveyed believe “global average temperatures have increased” during the past century; and 97% think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures. What is the significance of these statistics?

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming

While polls of scientists actively working in the filed of climate science indicate strong general agreement that Earth is warming and human activity is a significant factor, 31,000 scientists say there is "no convincing evidence" that humans can or will cause "catastrophic" heating of the atmosphere.

This claim originates from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has an online petition (petitionproject.org) that states:

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
To participate in the petition one only needs to mark a check box to show that one has a Ph.D., M.S., or B.S. degree, and then fill in the fields. Unfortunately, that means that anyone can sign the petition, whether they have a degree or not.

GW_Petition_Only_90dpi.png


Since the results are not verifiable, there is no way to know how many signers have actually earned a degree.

Do '31,000 scientists say global warming is not real'? Maybe. But more importantly what is the significance of these signatures? The majority of signatures are engineers (10,102). 3,046 are in medicine. 2,965 are in biology, biochemistry and agriculture. 4,822 in chemistry and chemical engineering.

Without formal training in climate science the level of understanding remains unknown among those that signed the petition. A key question is not how many of those that signed the petition know climate exists, but rather how many of those that signed work directly in the field of climate science.

Only 12% of those who signed...
According to the data on the petition site, only 12% of those who signed the petition are indicated to have affiliation with atmosphere, earth, and environmental science. But there is no indication how many work in the field of climate science?
 
Scientists weigh up new evidence on Antarctic ice melt

Q http://www.climatenewsnetwork.net/scientists-weigh-up-new-evidence-on-antarctic-ice-melt/

The two scientists used data from a US-German research satellite called GRACE − short for Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment.

The agency linked to the ice loss is a measured warming of the southern ocean that is reducing the sea ice, which in turn holds back the flow of ice on land. So glaciers are melting, and flowing towards the sea at a faster rate.

“The fact that West Antarctic ice melt is still accelerating is a big deal because it’s increasing its contribution to sea level rise,” Dr Harig says. “It really has the potential to be a runaway problem.

“It has come to the point that if we continue losing mass in those areas, the loss can generate a self-reinforcing feedback, whereby we will be losing more and more ice, ultimately raising sea levels.” – Climate News Network
UQ
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top