Australia and Canada decide to take a path of climate realism Posted on June 10, 2014 by Anthony Watts Prime Minister Tony Abbott with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper both say there is no need for carbon pricing to combat climate change.Australia And Canada Form Climate Realist Alliance Ottawa Citizen, 9 June 2014 Mark Kennedy The political leaders of Canada and Australia declared on Monday they wonât take any action to battle climate change that harms their national economies and threatens jobs. Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Australian counterpart, Tony Abbott, made the statements following a meeting on Parliament Hill. Posted on June 8, 2014 by Anthony Watts Bureaucracy, the rule of no one, has become the modern form of despotism. â Mary McCarthy Guest essay by Dr. Tim Ball The Daily Mail headline says, âCanada bans government meteorologists from talking about climate change.â It implies government censorship, but is actually another part of the political battle over global warming. It is reminiscent of James Hansenâs false claim that the Bush White House was muzzling him. John Theon, his NASA boss at the time, says in a US Senate Report it was untrue. There is always a story behind a headline and it is rarely what the media report or imply. This Canadian story forewarns of the problems of controlling bureaucracy. Continue reading â http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/...a-product-of-bureaucratic-political-activity/
We went through this already jerm, only 0.3 % expressly said that man has caused most of the warming over the last fifty years. Just like a similar percentage of biology papers expressly say that evolution is responsible for the current state of living organisms. A basic scientific fact is not repeated in every paper within that science. You are being intellectually dishonest. I call it lying.
The scientific authors of the papers were also contacted and asked to rate their own papers, and again over 97% whose papers took a position on the cause said humans are causing global warming.
Scientific organizations endorsing the consensus The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities": American Association for the Advancement of Science American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO British Antarctic Survey Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Environmental Protection Agency European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society Federation of American Scientists Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics National Center for Atmospheric Research National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Royal Meteorological Society Royal Society of the UK The Academies of Science from 80 different countries all endorse the consensus. NAS consensus 13 countries have signed a joint statement endorsing the consensus position: Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil) Royal Society of Canada Chinese Academy of Sciences Academie des Sciences (France) Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany) Indian National Science Academy Accademia dei Lincei (Italy) Science Council of Japan Academia Mexicana de Ciencias (Mexico) Russian Academy of Sciences Academy of Science of South Africa Royal Society (United Kingdom) National Academy of Sciences (USA) (12 Mar 2009 news release) A letter from 18 scientific organizations to US Congress states: "Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science." The consensus is also endorsed by a Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC), including the following bodies: African Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Kenya National Academy of Sciences Madagascar's National Academy of Arts, Letters and Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Uganda National Academy of Sciences Academy of Science of South Africa Tanzania Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences Zambia Academy of Sciences Sudan Academy of Sciences Other Academies of Sciences that endorse the consensus: Australian Academy of Science Royal Society of New Zealand Polish Academy of Sciences
No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[10] which in 2007[11] updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.
Although Salby's observation that CO2 concentration is lagging but beautifully correlated with the integrated temperature is quite convincing that temperature fluctuations are not primarily caused by CO2 concentration changes. (It could be the other way around.) Until one can explain how a CO2 caused temperature increase could result in the observed phase relationship, one has no choice but to question the idea that CO2 is the main factor controlling temperature. Additionally, we have learned that natural sourcing and sinking of CO2 is far greater (two orders) than the amount of CO2 added from Man's use of fossil fuels. And on top of that the latest studies find evidence seeming to indicate that the biosphere responds far more rapidly to CO2 concentration changes than was previously guessed. In the 1980s it was necessary to make reasonable guesses for all these numbers, but now the new satellite data is showing us that some of our guesses were far off. I think it is going to be "back to the drawing board" to re-think this entire business. Sadly, some of the key players got emotionally involved, and their pride is apparently interfering with their science. And then you have those like the Koch brothers and Gore getting involved and trying to influence popular opinion. That certainly hasn't helped one bit.
"Additionally, we have learned that natural sourcing and sinking of CO2 is far greater (two orders) than the amount of CO2 added from Man's use of fossil fuels." So the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is falling much faster than we thought?
Just amazing..you keep forgetting that CO2 can lead or lag, why do you keep forgetting that CO2 is a greenhouse gas? ..and again with this Salby crap study that is not relevant. Unbelievable. Maybe you did not read this the first ten times I posted it..... "From the foregoing, it is clear that CO2 is the key atmospheric gas that exerts principal control (80% of the non-condensing GHG forcing) over the strength of the terrestrial greenhouse effect. Water vapor and clouds are fast-acting feedback effects, and as such, they are controlled by the radiative forcing supplied by the non-condensing GHGs. The bottom line is that atmospheric carbon dioxide acts as a thermostat in regulating the temperature of Earth. The rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide due to human industrial activity is therefore setting the course for continued global warming. Because of the large heat capacity of the climate system, the global surface temperature does not respond instantaneously to the sharp upturn of the carbon dioxide thermostat, which at this moment stands at 386.80 ppm compared to the normal interglacial maximum level of 280 ppm. Since humans are responsible for changing the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, they then also have control over the global temperature of the Earth." http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/lacis_01/