The IPCC: Bogus data on "Climate Sensitivity"!!!

Discussion in 'Environment' started by skookerasbil, Mar 29, 2013.

  1. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    16,969
    Thanks Received:
    1,713
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,941
    Like Ive been saying for over a decade......cherry picked data is gay. All the shit we've seen from organizations like the IPCC is highly.......HIGHLY speculative. Accordingly, the models are based on subjectively analyzed data...........


    There’s an excellent piece here in The Economist that discusses climate sensitivity:

    “
    Other recent studies, though, paint a different picture. An unpublished report by the Research Council of Norway, a government-funded body, which was compiled by a team led by Terje Berntsen of the University of Oslo, uses a different method from the IPCC’s. It concludes there is a 90% probability that doubling CO₂ emissions will increase temperatures by only 1.2-2.9°C, with the most likely figure being 1.9°C. The top of the study’s range is well below the IPCC’s upper estimates of likely sensitivity.

    This study has not been peer-reviewed; it may be unreliable. But its projections are not unique. Work by Julia Hargreaves of the Research Institute for Global Change in Yokohama, which was published in 2012, suggests a 90% chance of the actual change being in the range of 0.5-4.0°C, with a mean of 2.3°C. This is based on the way the climate behaved about 20,000 years ago, at the peak of the last ice age, a period when carbon-dioxide concentrations leapt. Nic Lewis, an independent climate scientist, got an even lower range in a study accepted for publication: 1.0-3.0°C, with a mean of 1.6°C. His calculations reanalysed work cited by the IPCC and took account of more recent temperature data. In all these calculations, the chances of climate sensitivity above 4.5°C become vanishingly small.






    So we are suppossed to blow up whole economies based upon "estimates" with huge possible disparities.


    How fucking bogus...........and whats more fascinating is that people dont see this......or more likely, DONT WANT TO SEE THIS.:2up:



    The "climate change" stuff has always been about two things: 1) Redistribution of wealth 2) Destruction of all capitalistic societies.



    Climate Change Is Now Less Of a Problem. So We Need To Do Less About Climate Change - Forbes
     
  2. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    16,969
    Thanks Received:
    1,713
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,941
  3. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    12,028
    Thanks Received:
    832
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +883
    How worms aid the study of climate change...
    :eusa_eh:
    Antarctic nematodes and climate change
    26 April 2013 - Climate change affects not only air temperature and sea levels, but soil as well. And an American scientist is on an award-winning quest to reverse the damage.
     
  4. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    34,422
    Thanks Received:
    3,709
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +3,954
  5. Saigon
    Online

    Saigon Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    10,381
    Thanks Received:
    724
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Ratings:
    +814
    It's great to see that government-funded research is able to reach independent conclusions.

    Congratulations to Skooks here on once and hopefully for all ending this silly myth of researchers being part of some massive conspiracy.
     
  6. depotoo
    Offline

    depotoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,152
    Thanks Received:
    601
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +825
    Recommendation: The IPCC should encourage
    Review Editors to fully exercise their authority to
    ensure that reviewers’ comments are adequately
    considered by the authors and that genuine controversies
    are adequately reflected in the report.


    However, authors
    reported high confidence in some statements for
    which there is little evidence.
    Furthermore, by
    making vague statements that were difficult to
    refute, authors were able to attach ‘high confidence’
    to the statements. The Working Group II Summary
    for Policymakers contains many such statements
    that are not supported sufficiently
    in the literature,
    not put into perspective, or not expressed clearly.


    So you state it is silly to state there have been many falsehoods within the reports? Read the above. These are from the recommendations from the Climate Change Assessments, Review of the Processes & Procedures of the IPCC.
    This report was written after investigation by the committee set up to assess the data due to the leaked e-mails. -
    Overview
    The InterAcademy Council is requested to conduct an independent review of the IPCC processes and the procedures by which it prepares its assessments of climate change.


    InterAcademy Council | Review of the IPCC | An Evaluation of the Procedures and Processes of the InterGovernmental Panel on Climate Change
     
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    56,998
    Thanks Received:
    9,112
    Trophy Points:
    300
    Ratings:
    +10,360
    IPCC redistributing wealth through Climate Policy

    Yeah, that's science
     
  8. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,855
    Thanks Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +494
    And what is happening to temperatures? Even your high priests admit that they don't know nearly as much as they though they knew. Obiously CO2 isn't a control knob. In fact, a study just published in Nature, finds that CO2 is a slave to temperature, not the other way around.

    http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n5/full/nclimate1817.html


    That's not reality...that's a prediction based on models that isn't looking good for your side right now.

    Again...not reality...predictions based on flawed models.
     
  9. depotoo
    Offline

    depotoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,152
    Thanks Received:
    601
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +825
    #1 I know personally of a couple of climate scientists that work with a certain agency for almost 30 years that are very aware of the cherry picking of data stations that has gone on, as well as many being taken off line and state within their research of the data themselves that what the IPCC has stated in the past is very much non-inclusive. They claim this has resulted in manipuation of the models.
    #2 Many scientists, within their research and certain findings have stated explicitly that the models need to be adjusted, due to their findings.
    #3 Climate models have been less than reliable in other climate related research for years where it is even more important to the public interests. They change those models usually at least once a year, if not more often. And some of those changes have resulted in even less reliability at times. Sometimes it does make them better but still they lack being able to go further than a few days.

    So the assumption by many that climate models can accurately predict decades into the future is rather arrogant, if you ask me.

    Does anyone realize that much of the funds the US govt. supplies to the IPCC is not even reported by those agencies within our government doing so? Recently that was brought to the forefront and how that reporting had to be improved upon. Also the US is the principal provider of funds for the IPCC.
     
  10. depotoo
    Offline

    depotoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,152
    Thanks Received:
    601
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +825
    Possibly due to the expected harsher review of the data is suddenly making them report that there seems to be some cooling or slow down in warming going on?
     

Share This Page