Hansen Descends Into Realm of Religious Quackery

[westwall]

Hansen has finally done it. He has had to alter his prediction of the end of the world because...well it didn't end. Kind of like that religious fanatic in CA who predicted the end of the world and then issued a correction when it didn't happen. He misread the scriptures you see. Looks like Hansen did the same. What a pathetic excuse for a scientist...

Boy, those natural cycles sure are pesky little bastards aren't they!


"This is interesting - here is the latest paper from James Hansen and coauthor Miki Sato Paleoclimate Implications for Human-Made Climate Change. If you are up to reading climate science papers it's highly recommended (I'm a little slow in getting to it - the press release was Dec 8th 2011 but I just got to reading it yesterday and today).

A little background is in order - one of the serious scientific debates in the climate science community over the last decade has been the implications of the unexpectedly large acceleration of glacier discharge in Greenland and Antarctica and in particular a discovery by Zwally et al in 2002 that surface melt water can get down the base of a glacier and lubricate its motion. Prior to the early 2000s it was assumed that ice sheets would decay mainly by melting on the surface and climate models all assumed that they would decay only very slowly in a warmer world - it was a surprise to realize that the most important breakdown mode was actually basal lubrication and sliding down into the ocean.

Hansen in particular became the leading spokesman for the view that the ice sheets on Greenland and parts of Antarctica would prove quite unstable under Anthropocene conditions and might break down in a rapid non-linear manner and cause very large levels of twenty-first century sea level rise. See for example this essay from 2005 in which he says:


Consider the situation during past ice sheet disintegrations. In melt-water pulse 1A, about 14,000 years ago, sea level rose about 20 m in approximately 400 years (Kienast et al., 2003). That is an average of 1 m of sea level rise every 20 years. The nature of glacier disintegration required for delivery of that much water from the ice sheets to the ocean would be spectacular (5 cm of sea level, the mean annual change, is about 15,000 cubic kilometers of water). “Explosively” would be an apt description, if future ice sheet disintegration were to occur at a substantial fraction of the melt-water pulse 1A rate.

Are we on a slippery slope now? Can human-made global warming cause ice sheet melting measured in meters of sea level rise, not centimeters, and can this occur in centuries, not millennia? Can the very inertia of the ice sheets, which protects us from rapid sea level change now, become our bete noire as portions of the ice sheet begin to accelerate, making it practically impossible to avoid disaster for coastal regions?"



Hansen still argues 5m 21st C sea level rise possible | Energy Bulletin

 

[konradv]

I find the following from the article, very interesting.

Before we go on it's worth emphasizing the important aside - hardly any climate scientists doubt that huge quantities of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets would eventually melt and cause tens of meters of sea level rise as a result of human climate modifications - the debate is solely about how much of the consequences of our actions we will experience in the 21st century.

It corroborates that the questions are "when" and "how bad", NOT "if".

 

[bripat9643]

I find the following from the article, very interesting.

Before we go on it's worth emphasizing the important aside - hardly any climate scientists doubt that huge quantities of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets would eventually melt and cause tens of meters of sea level rise as a result of human climate modifications - the debate is solely about how much of the consequences of our actions we will experience in the 21st century.

It corroborates that the questions are "when" and "how bad", NOT "if".

The quoted material is by a warmist cult member. It proves nothing other than the gullibility of warmists.

 

[westwall]

I find the following from the article, very interesting.

Before we go on it's worth emphasizing the important aside - hardly any climate scientists doubt that huge quantities of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets would eventually melt and cause tens of meters of sea level rise as a result of human climate modifications - the debate is solely about how much of the consequences of our actions we will experience in the 21st century.

It corroborates that the questions are "when" and "how bad", NOT "if".

Sure konny. Hansen predicted back in 1988 that sea levels would rise at least 10 feet if drastic measures weren't undertaken THEN to curtail CO2 output. The CO2 levels have far outstripped even his worst wet dream and just like the religious kooks you rip to shreds, he does his little two step, and just like the religious zealots who follow those religious charlatans....you plug your ears and go along.

Pathetic.

At least the religious blogger admits that it's now just the climatologists adhering to scripture, the rest of science has said, "yep they're frauds" and moved on.

 

[konradv]

I find the following from the article, very interesting.

Before we go on it's worth emphasizing the important aside - hardly any climate scientists doubt that huge quantities of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets would eventually melt and cause tens of meters of sea level rise as a result of human climate modifications - the debate is solely about how much of the consequences of our actions we will experience in the 21st century.

It corroborates that the questions are "when" and "how bad", NOT "if".

Sure konny. Hansen predicted back in 1988 that sea levels would rise at least 10 feet if drastic measures weren't undertaken THEN to curtail CO2 output. The CO2 levels have far outstripped even his worst wet dream and just like the religious kooks you rip to shreds, he does his little two step, and just like the religious zealots who follow those religious charlatans....you plug your ears and go along.

Pathetic.

A "when" or "how bad" question, not an "if" question. Which side of the triangle are you on these days?

 

[westwall]

I find the following from the article, very interesting.

Before we go on it's worth emphasizing the important aside - hardly any climate scientists doubt that huge quantities of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets would eventually melt and cause tens of meters of sea level rise as a result of human climate modifications - the debate is solely about how much of the consequences of our actions we will experience in the 21st century.

It corroborates that the questions are "when" and "how bad", NOT "if".

Sure konny. Hansen predicted back in 1988 that sea levels would rise at least 10 feet if drastic measures weren't undertaken THEN to curtail CO2 output. The CO2 levels have far outstripped even his worst wet dream and just like the religious kooks you rip to shreds, he does his little two step, and just like the religious zealots who follow those religious charlatans....you plug your ears and go along.

Pathetic.

A "when" or "how bad" question, not an "if" question. Which side of the triangle are you on these days?

Religious quackery is religious quackery, no matter which deity you worship.

 

[konradv]

Sure konny. Hansen predicted back in 1988 that sea levels would rise at least 10 feet if drastic measures weren't undertaken THEN to curtail CO2 output. The CO2 levels have far outstripped even his worst wet dream and just like the religious kooks you rip to shreds, he does his little two step, and just like the religious zealots who follow those religious charlatans....you plug your ears and go along.

Pathetic.

A "when" or "how bad" question, not an "if" question. Which side of the triangle are you on these days?

Religious quackery is religious quackery, no matter which deity you worship.

But isn't that my question, what's your deity? You accuse, but refuse to reveal!

 

[westwall]

A "when" or "how bad" question, not an "if" question. Which side of the triangle are you on these days?

Religious quackery is religious quackery, no matter which deity you worship.

But isn't that my question, what's your deity? You accuse, but refuse to reveal!

My deity is science and the proper usage thereof. Actually following the scientific method, something you AGW religious quacks wipe your asses with.

 

[Old Rocks]

Your diety is your rightwingnut political ideology, Walleyes.

Dr. Hansen has worldwide recognition as a leading, if not the leading, climatologist. I doubt that anyone outside your immediate circle of freinds even knows who you are, and even there, you are not considered to have any authority on this subject.

Virtually all the papers being published in real science journals only debate the timing of ocean rise, not the fact that it is rising.

Stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet in a warming world : Nature Geoscience : Nature Publishing Group

Stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet in a warming world
Ian Joughin1 & Richard B. Alley2
AffiliationsCorresponding author Journal name:
Nature Geoscience
Volume:
4,
Pages:
506–513
Year published:
(2011)
DOI:
doi:10.1038/ngeo1194
Published online24 July 2011 Abstract
AbstractIntroductionWAIS history as a possible prelude to the futureInstability mechanismsThe WAIS over the next millennium

Ice sheets are expected to shrink in size as the world warms, which in turn will raise sea level. The West Antarctic ice sheet is of particular concern, because it was probably much smaller at times during the past million years when temperatures were comparable to levels that might be reached or exceeded within the next few centuries. Much of the grounded ice in West Antarctica lies on a bed that deepens inland and extends well below sea level. Oceanic and atmospheric warming threaten to reduce or eliminate the floating ice shelves that buttress the ice sheet at present. Loss of the ice shelves would accelerate the flow of non-floating ice near the coast. Because of the slope of the sea bed, the consequent thinning could ultimately float much of the ice sheet's interior. In this scenario, global sea level would rise by more than three metres, at an unknown rate. Simplified analyses suggest that much of the ice sheet will survive beyond this century. We do not know how likely or inevitable eventual collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet is at this stage, but the possibility cannot be discarded. For confident projections of the fate of the ice sheet and the rate of any collapse, further work including the development of well-validated physical models will be required

 

[westwall]

Your diety is your rightwingnut political ideology, Walleyes.

Dr. Hansen has worldwide recognition as a leading, if not the leading, climatologist. I doubt that anyone outside your immediate circle of freinds even knows who you are, and even there, you are not considered to have any authority on this subject.

Virtually all the papers being published in real science journals only debate the timing of ocean rise, not the fact that it is rising.

Stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet in a warming world : Nature Geoscience : Nature Publishing Group

Stability of the West Antarctic ice sheet in a warming world
Ian Joughin1 & Richard B. Alley2
AffiliationsCorresponding author Journal name:
Nature Geoscience
Volume:
4,
Pages:
506–513
Year published:
(2011)
DOI:
doi:10.1038/ngeo1194
Published online24 July 2011 Abstract
AbstractIntroductionWAIS history as a possible prelude to the futureInstability mechanismsThe WAIS over the next millennium

Ice sheets are expected to shrink in size as the world warms, which in turn will raise sea level. The West Antarctic ice sheet is of particular concern, because it was probably much smaller at times during the past million years when temperatures were comparable to levels that might be reached or exceeded within the next few centuries. Much of the grounded ice in West Antarctica lies on a bed that deepens inland and extends well below sea level. Oceanic and atmospheric warming threaten to reduce or eliminate the floating ice shelves that buttress the ice sheet at present. Loss of the ice shelves would accelerate the flow of non-floating ice near the coast. Because of the slope of the sea bed, the consequent thinning could ultimately float much of the ice sheet's interior. In this scenario, global sea level would rise by more than three metres, at an unknown rate. Simplified analyses suggest that much of the ice sheet will survive beyond this century. We do not know how likely or inevitable eventual collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet is at this stage, but the possibility cannot be discarded. For confident projections of the fate of the ice sheet and the rate of any collapse, further work including the development of well-validated physical models will be required

Yes he does, and I constantly wonder why. He hasn't been correct on anything since 1988. He is now forced to resort to outright fraud to try and support his BS.