Ruh Roh The warmers are losing teh Royal Society!

[westwall]

It appears that the Royal Society has figured out that it was backing the wrong pony and is going to review its AGW statements...and it is going to have SCEPTICS on the panel oh my!


Latest climate climbdown: the Royal Society reviews its statements on global warming – Telegraph Blogs


I told you old fraud...the end is nigh!

 

[Oddball]

Any truth to the rumor that the guy "investigating" CRU has a wee bit of a conflict of interest?

 

[westwall]

Any truth to the rumor that the guy "investigating" CRU has a wee bit of a conflict of interest?

No rumor at all Dude. 'Tis a fact that the Lord has a very large investment in the carbon trading markets.

 

[Oddball]

Have a link to that one?

I can't find the story anywhere.

 

[westwall]

Have a link to that one?

I can't find the story anywhere.

Here you go Dude. The second story refers to Lord Oxburgh as a carbon trading profiteer.

Collide-a-scape Blog Archive Collide-a-scape >> An Inconvenient Provocateur

Peter Foster: Climategate whitewash - Full Comment

 

[Old Rocks]

Must re-read statement from UK’s Royal Society and Met Office on the connection between global warming and extreme weather Climate Progress

Summary
The 2007 IPCC Assessment, the most comprehensive and respected analysis of climate change to date, states clearly that without substantial global reductions of greenhouse gas emissions we can likely expect a world of increasing droughts, floods and species loss, of rising seas and displaced human populations. However even since the 2007 IPCC Assessment the evidence for dangerous, long-term and potentially irreversible climate change has strengthened. The scientific evidence which underpins calls for action at Copenhagen is very strong. Without co-ordinated international action on greenhouse gas emissions, the impacts on climate and civilisation could be severe.

Professor Julia Slingo, Chief Scientist, Met Office
Professor Alan Thorpe, Chief Executive, NERC
Lord Rees, President, the Royal Society

 

[Old Rocks]

Global warming in the public sphere ? Philosophical Transactions A

Global warming in the public sphere
Jan Corfee-Morlot1*†, Mark Maslin1 and Jacquelin Burgess2
+ Author Affiliations

1Geography Department, University College London Pearson Building, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
2School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
Author for correspondence ([email protected])
Abstract
Although the science of global warming has been in place for several decades if not more, only in the last decade and a half has the issue moved clearly into the public sphere as a public policy issue and a political priority. To understand how and why this has occurred, it is essential to consider the history of the scientific theory of the greenhouse effect, the evidence that supports it and the mechanisms through which science interacts with lay publics and other elite actors, such as politicians, policymakers and business decision makers. This article reviews why and how climate change has moved from the bottom to the top of the international political agenda. It traces the scientific discovery of global warming, political and institutional developments to manage it as well as other socially mediated pathways for understanding and promoting global warming as an issue in the public sphere. The article also places this historical overview of global warming as a public issue into a conceptual framework for understanding relationships between society and nature with emphasis on the co-construction of knowledge.

 

[Old Rocks]

According to these fellows I have been far too conservative in judging the geological effects of a rapid climate change.

Table of Contents ? May 28, 2010, 368 (1919) ? Philosophical Transactions A

 

[Old Rocks]

Statement of the 11 National Academies of Science, including the US, Canada, and China

http://www.nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf

Climate change is real
There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system
as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now
strong evidence that significant global warming is
occurring1. The evidence comes from direct measurements
of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean
temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in
average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes
to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that
most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed
to human activities (IPCC 2001)2. This warming has already
led to changes in the Earth's climate.
The existence of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is
vital to life on Earth – in their absence average
temperatures would be about 30 centigrade degrees lower
than they are today. But human activities are now causing
atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases –
including carbon dioxide, methane, tropospheric ozone,
and nitrous oxide – to rise well above pre-industrial levels.
Carbon dioxide levels have increased from 280 ppm in
1750 to over 375 ppm today – higher than any previous
levels that can be reliably measured (i.e. in the last 420,000
years). Increasing greenhouse gases are causing
temperatures to rise; the Earth’s surface warmed by
approximately 0.6 centigrade degrees over the twentieth
century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) projected that the average global surface
temperatures will continue to increase to between 1.4
centigrade degrees and 5.8 centigrade degrees above 1990
levels, by 2100.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://royalsociety.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=5591

Our scientific understanding of climate change is sufficiently sound to make us highly confident that
greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming. Science moves forward by challenge and debate
and this will continue. However, none of the current criticisms of climate science, nor the alternative
explanations of global warming are well enough founded to make not taking any action the wise choice.
The science clearly points to the need for nations to take urgent steps to cut greenhouse gas emissions
into the atmosphere, as much and as fast as possible, to reduce the more severe aspects of climate
change. We must also prepare for the impacts of climate change, some of which are already inevitable.
This document was compiled with the help of the Royal Society Climate Change Advisory Group and
other leading experts.

 

[westwall]

I notice you posted a bunch of OLD links...well done! No one would notice that...huh unh no one.

 

[Old Rocks]

Same level of people involved in both debates. Same kind of idiots.


Society fights battle royal over creationism, global warming - Chicago Tribune

The Royal Society can still boast of being on science's cutting edge, but in recent months it has found itself fighting an unexpected rear-guard battle against what is considers "unsound thinking" and bad science--most notably on the part of big oil companies that dispute climate change, and proponents of creationism and intelligent design who question Darwin's theory of evolution.

 

[Old Rocks]

I notice you posted a bunch of OLD links...well done! No one would notice that...huh unh no one.

I see, you dumb fuck. 28May10 is too old for your tastes?

 

[westwall]

I notice you posted a bunch of OLD links...well done! No one would notice that...huh unh no one.

I see, you dumb fuck. 28May10 is too old for your tastes?

No tard I was referring to the Feb 13 2010 link you posted, and the 2008 link and the 2007 link and the 2005 link. The only relevant link you posted was the one for May 28th but no you have to try and baffle us with BS. Guess what it don't work no more. And you cowardly snake, why don't you answer the question I posed about Phil Jones' assertion that there has been no warming in 12 years. Why don't you answer that question?

The only dumb **** I see is the one staring back at YOU in the mirror.

 

[Old Rocks]

Seems you dumb dingleberrys are not keeping up with the Royal Society publications.

Royal Society Stunner: Hazardous geosphere activity and global warming linked // Current

Royal Society Stunner: “Observations suggest that the ongoing rise in global average temperatures may already be eliciting a hazardous response from the geosphere.” Climate Progress...

Periods of exceptional climate change in Earth history are associated with a dynamic response from the solid Earth, involving enhanced levels of potentially hazardous geological and geomorphological activity. This response is expressed through the adjustment, modulation or triggering of a wide range of surface and crustal phenomena, including volcanic and seismic activity, submarine and sub-aerial landslides, tsunamis and landslide ’splash’ waves glacial outburst and rock-dam failure floods, debris flows and gas-hydrate destabilisation. Looking ahead, modelling studies and projection of current trends point towards increased risk in relation to a spectrum of geological and geomorphological hazards in a world warmed by anthropogenic climate change, while observations suggest that the ongoing rise in global average temperatures may already be eliciting a hazardous response from the geosphere.

 

[Old Rocks]

I notice you posted a bunch of OLD links...well done! No one would notice that...huh unh no one.

I see, you dumb fuck. 28May10 is too old for your tastes?

No tard I was referring to the Feb 13 2010 link you posted. The only relevant link you posted was the one for May 28th but no you have to try and baffle us with BS. Guess what it don't work no more. And you cowardly snake, why don't you answer the question I posed about Phil Jones' assertion that there has been no warming in 12 years. Why don't you answer that question?

Poor dumb ass, you have yet to post anything except articles from the equivelant of the National Enquirier. Why don't you post something from a scientific source?

The Royal Society reviewing its policy stands on global warming? Of course, just as the AGU reviews it's policy statements on a regular basis. And I bet the result is the same, that the Royal Society will come out with a stronger statement concerning the effects and dangers in the warming than it did in prior policy statements.

 

[Old Rocks]

A rather long and informative statement from the Attorney General of the State of California.

Global Warming Contrarians and the Falsehoods they Promote - Global Warming - California Dept. of Justice - Office of the Attorney General

Who’s Behind the Global Warming Deniers?
It’s well documented that many global warming deniers have ties to, or are funded by, members of coal and oil-related industries. These industry members will do whatever it takes to continue our dependence on fossil fuels and to delay the establishment of any alternatives. They have a vested interest in "business as usual."

As Newsweek recently reported, certain fossil fuel industry members and groups have spent a great deal of money to keep the true facts about global warming from the public.

Since the late 1980s, this well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change. Through advertisements, op-eds, lobbying and media attention, greenhouse doubters (they hate being called deniers) argued first that the world is not warming; measurements indicating otherwise are flawed, they said. Then they claimed that any warming is natural, not caused by human activities. Now they contend that the looming warming will be minuscule and harmless. 8
Of course, not every scientist who expresses doubt is funded by the fossil fuel industry. But, clearly, the industry is spending significant money to create the misleading impression that there is no scientific consensus and that the fundamental points about global warming are still open questions.

 

[Zander]

It takes willful stupidity to believe in AGW.

 

[westwall]

Seems you dumb dingleberrys are not keeping up with the Royal Society publications.

Royal Society Stunner: Hazardous geosphere activity and global warming linked // Current

Royal Society Stunner: “Observations suggest that the ongoing rise in global average temperatures may already be eliciting a hazardous response from the geosphere.” Climate Progress...

Periods of exceptional climate change in Earth history are associated with a dynamic response from the solid Earth, involving enhanced levels of potentially hazardous geological and geomorphological activity. This response is expressed through the adjustment, modulation or triggering of a wide range of surface and crustal phenomena, including volcanic and seismic activity, submarine and sub-aerial landslides, tsunamis and landslide ’splash’ waves glacial outburst and rock-dam failure floods, debris flows and gas-hydrate destabilisation. Looking ahead, modelling studies and projection of current trends point towards increased risk in relation to a spectrum of geological and geomorphological hazards in a world warmed by anthropogenic climate change, while observations suggest that the ongoing rise in global average temperatures may already be eliciting a hazardous response from the geosphere.

Well at least your trying to get your links from 2010 now. April 19 and 23 I think it was great! And my link says that the Royal Society (of which I am a member) is going to reasses their policies and have actual climate sceptics as part of the panel. None of which your links address, now do they?

Face it your science is junk, your ethics are nonexistent and you are soon to be a bad dream from the past. Move on.

 

[westwall]

I see, you dumb fuck. 28May10 is too old for your tastes?

No tard I was referring to the Feb 13 2010 link you posted. The only relevant link you posted was the one for May 28th but no you have to try and baffle us with BS. Guess what it don't work no more. And you cowardly snake, why don't you answer the question I posed about Phil Jones' assertion that there has been no warming in 12 years. Why don't you answer that question?

Poor dumb ass, you have yet to post anything except articles from the equivelant of the National Enquirier. Why don't you post something from a scientific source?

The Royal Society reviewing its policy stands on global warming? Of course, just as the AGU reviews it's policy statements on a regular basis. And I bet the result is the same, that the Royal Society will come out with a stronger statement concerning the effects and dangers in the warming than it did in prior policy statements.

You're dreaming pal. This time they are going to listen to the membership or face some very severe consequences that they can't afford. Nope this time the truth will out and you and your ilk are doomed...finally!