What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

climatechangepredictions

IanC

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
11,064
Reaction score
1,315
Points
245
a new blog- Classics ClimateChangePredictions.org

We are a small group who have followed the global warming/ climate change issue for some years. Initially we didn’t know which version was correct but we noticed several things. One was the frequent use of predictions, often scary, that seemed on the surface to be believable. We wondered whether anyone ever went back to see if the predictions turned out to be true.

This blog presents predictions that have been made over the past 40 years or so and we leave it to you to make up your own mind about them.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
60,838
Reaction score
8,220
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
123,053
Reaction score
38,886
Points
2,290
a new blog- Classics ClimateChangePredictions.org

We are a small group who have followed the global warming/ climate change issue for some years. Initially we didn’t know which version was correct but we noticed several things. One was the frequent use of predictions, often scary, that seemed on the surface to be believable. We wondered whether anyone ever went back to see if the predictions turned out to be true.

This blog presents predictions that have been made over the past 40 years or so and we leave it to you to make up your own mind about them.

I predict the nutjobs in the AGWCult will ignore their prior Doomsday's predictions
 
OP
I

IanC

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
11,064
Reaction score
1,315
Points
245
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.


Viner is not a climate scientist?

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,340
Reaction score
28,692
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
A most excellent addition the AGW beatdown party! Thanks for posting it!
 
OP
I

IanC

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
11,064
Reaction score
1,315
Points
245
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.


Hansen is not a climate scientist?

“The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today – which is what we expect later this century – sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don’t act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth’s history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself.”
Jim Hansen, “Climate change: On the edge” The Independent, 17th February, 2006

edit- I shouldlook up the Hansen quote where he said a certain boardwalk in NYC was going to be underwater by now, and that NYC would be swamped with criminals because it was going to get hot. hahahahaha
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,340
Reaction score
28,692
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.






Summary, "we have made so many failed predictions that now we are just going to bleat "DENIER" and plug our ears, and stick out our tongues at you!"

Truly olfraud, you are too funny!

Why do you feel so threatened by a group that chronicles the failed AGW predictions? Science is about MEASUREMENT! Here you are railing against a group that merely wants to measure your sides accuracy. What can possibly be wrong with that?:eusa_think:
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
60,838
Reaction score
8,220
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.


Hansen is not a climate scientist?

“The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today – which is what we expect later this century – sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don’t act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth’s history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself.”
Jim Hansen, “Climate change: On the edge” The Independent, 17th February, 2006

edit- I shouldlook up the Hansen quote where he said a certain boardwalk in NYC was going to be underwater by now, and that NYC would be swamped with criminals because it was going to get hot. hahahahaha
Yes, by all means you should look it up. And if you cannot, then you should apologize for lying.

Now that prediciton you posted was made in 2006. So, most of us here will not live to see whether it comes true or not. However, Dr. Hansen's predictions have been a lot closer to what has happened than all the deniars flap yap about how it wasn't getting warmer, and Walleyes silly predictions of cooling. Been waiting five years for that cooling. In those five years, 2010 and 2014, have been record warm years.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
60,838
Reaction score
8,220
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.






Summary, "we have made so many failed predictions that now we are just going to bleat "DENIER" and plug our ears, and stick out our tongues at you!"

Truly olfraud, you are too funny!

Why do you feel so threatened by a group that chronicles the failed AGW predictions? Science is about MEASUREMENT! Here you are railing against a group that merely wants to measure your sides accuracy. What can possibly be wrong with that?:eusa_think:
How about your sides accuracy? Up to 2000, you fools were bleating that nothing at all was happening. Now you are saying, "OK, so something is happening, but it is just natural cycles". Except you cannot name what those cycles are. And you, personally, have been predicting cooling for the last five years. And every year of that has been one of the ten warmest years on record. Now that is a real record of failure.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
73,340
Reaction score
28,692
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.






Summary, "we have made so many failed predictions that now we are just going to bleat "DENIER" and plug our ears, and stick out our tongues at you!"

Truly olfraud, you are too funny!

Why do you feel so threatened by a group that chronicles the failed AGW predictions? Science is about MEASUREMENT! Here you are railing against a group that merely wants to measure your sides accuracy. What can possibly be wrong with that?:eusa_think:
How about your sides accuracy? Up to 2000, you fools were bleating that nothing at all was happening. Now you are saying, "OK, so something is happening, but it is just natural cycles". Except you cannot name what those cycles are. And you, personally, have been predicting cooling for the last five years. And every year of that has been one of the ten warmest years on record. Now that is a real record of failure.





Wrong. We were saying it was all natural cycles and natural variability. How do you expect anyone to take even the slightest bit seriously when you lie about the basics?
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
60,838
Reaction score
8,220
Points
2,040
Location
Portland, Ore.
OK. So name the Goddamned cycles. And 'natural variability' that is in the third deviation? OK...............

The scientists from Tyndall to today have shown what the cause of the warming is. The only people that deny it are whores on the payroll of the energy corperations, and those so far into their senility that they cannot deal with reality.
 

skookerasbil

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
35,975
Reaction score
4,503
Points
1,140
Location
Not the middle of nowhere
Excellent source Ian.....winning!!! I'll be sure to be throwing these updates up on the PROOF THE SKEPTICS ARE WINNING thread.......gotta keep people informed about how deceptive these people are.:up:

I think it also would be further instructive to point out in these threads how dedicated the AGW crowd is to completely dismissing all the failed predictions with one of their denial phrases......and highlight how they believe there are no failed predictions and sell it that way.:slap:

To me, that is my only role in this forum........to highlight to the unenlightened how blatantly dishonest these people are about this stuff and yes......paint them as what they truly are: a religion dedicated to weath redistribution/world government schemes using environmentalism as the scare tactic/ruse. Also.....we need to be pointing out that despite the dogma, climate science is not mattering in the real world because the cost of their solutions is prohibitive.
 
Last edited:

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
144,006
Reaction score
32,712
Points
2,180
FAIL!

In 1988, James Hansen projected future warming trends. He used 3 different scenarios, identified as A, B, and C. Each represented different levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Scenario A assumed greenhouse gas emissions would continue to accelerate. Scenario B assumed a slowing and eventually constant rate of growth. Scenario C assumed a rapid decline in greenhouse gas emissions around the year 2000. The actual greenhouse gas emissions since 1988 have been closest to Scenario B. As shown below, the actual warming has been less than Scenario B.


Hansen_1988.gif
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
144,006
Reaction score
32,712
Points
2,180
Climate model accuracy:

Climate-Model-Comparison.png


FAIL!
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
101,254
Reaction score
13,403
Points
2,180
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf

Summary. The global temperature rose by 0.20C between the middle 1960's and
1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is
consistent with the calculated greenhouse effect due to measured increases of
atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar
luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend
of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming
should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the
century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980's. Potential effects on
climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North
America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West
Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the
fabled Northwest Passage.

If you wish to post the words of non-scientists on this subject, why bother to pretend that you are not a full fledged deniar.

Just as we can find those that state that CO2 is not a GHG, you can find a few with wild eyed predicitons concerning the present warming. However, if you look at the scientific literature, you will find that, for the most part, the predictions have been rather conservative. Certainly no one foresaw the rapidity of the present retreat of the arctic ice.


Hansen is not a climate scientist?

“The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today – which is what we expect later this century – sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don’t act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth’s history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself.”
Jim Hansen, “Climate change: On the edge” The Independent, 17th February, 2006

edit- I shouldlook up the Hansen quote where he said a certain boardwalk in NYC was going to be underwater by now, and that NYC would be swamped with criminals because it was going to get hot. hahahahaha
Yes, by all means you should look it up. And if you cannot, then you should apologize for lying.

Now that prediciton you posted was made in 2006. So, most of us here will not live to see whether it comes true or not. However, Dr. Hansen's predictions have been a lot closer to what has happened than all the deniars flap yap about how it wasn't getting warmer, and Walleyes silly predictions of cooling. Been waiting five years for that cooling. In those five years, 2010 and 2014, have been record warm years.
hmmmm....here let me make a slight adjustment right here. Bam.......I'm right you're wrong. Hahahahahahhahahahaha, I see how that works and so does everyone else. Even you, and yet you still believe them. You're worse than anyone else on here to know something is wrong and still post as fact. that is the worse diseption in the world. And you do it daily. Shame on you!!
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$201.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top