New paper that selects hockey-stick data finds only 0.25C global warming over past 1000 years If you take the flawed hockey only stick data out there may not be any warming in Southern hemisphere. http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/03/new-paper-that-selects-only-hockey.html
since fraudcurrents is up to his old consensus tricks, I felt compelled to bring this thread back up. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/...ven-by-a-new-paper-showing-major-math-errors/ â0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%â PRESS RELEASE â September 3rd, 2013 A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950. A tweet in President Obamaâs name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous: âNinety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.â [Emphasis added] The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was âdangerousâ. The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%. Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.
American Geophysical Union "Humanâinduced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5
Ninety Degree Days In Virginia In Sharp Decline Over the past 80 years, the frequency of ninety degree days in Virginia through July 9 is down about 40%. Heidi Cullenâs Climate Central lies about this constantly. They apparently make money off generating irrational fear about the climate. http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/ninety-degree-days-in-virginia-in-sharp-decline/
its similar fraudcurrents and these other nutters who say the current drought in CA is due to global warming. In many places around the world including California drought comes from cooler and subsequently drier air. So to be consistent if these co2 nutter's minds were not so dissonant they would realize they should be saying we should be pumping out more co2 to end the drought. (that is if they really believe co2 causes warming).
Trader666 posted this on the other thread. Which is really incredible. No thread for at least the next 85 years... says the studies commissioned by the IPCC. Junk Science Week: IPCC commissioned models to see if global warming would reach dangerous levels this century. Consensus is ânoâ http://business.financialpost.com/20...hange-warming/
National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed current scientific opinion on climate change. These assessments are generally consistent with the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report summarized: Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as evidenced by increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, the widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.[5] Most of the global warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to human activities.[6] Benefits and costs of climate change for [human] society will vary widely by location and scale.[7] Some of the effects in temperate and polar regions will be positive and others elsewhere will be negative.[7] Overall, net effects are more likely to be strongly negative with larger or more rapid warming.[7] The range of published evidence indicates that the net damage costs of climate change are likely to be significant and to increase over time.[8] The resilience of many ecosystems is likely to be exceeded this century by an unprecedented combination of climate change, associated disturbances (e.g. flooding, drought, wildfire, insects, ocean acidification) and other global change drivers (e.g. land-use change, pollution, fragmentation of natural systems, over-exploitation of resources).[9] 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.[12] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.
CO2... not a problem for at least the next 85 years.... says UN's IPCC studies. its over for your b.s. fraudcurrents. Junk Science Week: IPCC commissioned models to see if global warming would reach dangerous levels this century. Consensus is ânoâ http://business.financialpost.com/20...hange-warming/[/QUOTE]
science really knows very little about global warming... <iframe width="480" height="308" src="http://www.ustream.tv/embed/recorded/49789102?v=3&wmode=direct" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: 0px none transparent;"> </iframe> <br /><a href="http://www.ustream.tv" style="font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; font-weight: normal; text-align: left;" target="_blank">Broadcast live streaming video on Ustream</a>
Rasmussen Poll: 63% say the debate about global warming is not over, 60% pan BBCâs decision to exclude skeptics http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/...ver-60-pan-bbcs-decision-to-exclude-skeptics/