Sea level potential rise doubles in new study

[Old Rocks]

And another whiff. Westwall gives us 107 examples of ...

1. Predictions that came true
2. Predictions that weren't actually made, having been ripped screaming out of context.
3. Predictions made by people who weren't climate scientists
4. Predictions made by a single scientist that didn't represent any sort of consensus.

So, we've still got deniers unable to show even a single case of a consensus climate science prediction being wrong.

What will it take for you deniers to stop deflecting and admit your "scientists have been wrong" nonsense is merely a dishonest mantra that the denier religion orders its acolytes to chant?

Really? Which one of those predictions came true?

January and February of this year have been the warmest ever recorded. That does look like a warmer winter, now doesn't it. Dry summers? Oregon and Washington just had a summer where the fires were so intense that they did not try to save the forests, instead they were trying to save the small towns. Damned near lost three of them in my home area.

 

[Wyatt earp]

<Quoting botched Salon interview>

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress

And Bear whiffs again, posting the same old flawed Hansen interview. The interviewer there admitted that he screwed it up big time and misrepresented what Hansen said.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110126_SingingInTheRain.pdf

---
Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message: "I went back to my book and reread the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later - probably because I'd been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.
---

Hansen's flooding prediction was not for "20 years from the time of the interview". It was for "40 years after a doubling of the CO2 concentration". Which was 350ppm at the time, so the clock on the 40 years starts ticking whenever 700 ppm is reached, which will be a while.

It's been known for 5 years now, that the Salon interview was botched. Deniers ... don't care. Poor Bear had no hope of knowing he was parroting a lie, because his cult leaders didn't want him to know that. Point is, poor Bear whiffed again in his quest to find some sort of failed prediction.

Ha try this one ***** I have the book right in front of me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, page 30

"I would not bet that the Mississippi Gulf Coast will get hit by a super hurricane in any particular year, but I certainly plan on it being hit again sometime over the next ten years:I wouldn't be surprised if it where hit by more then one" Joesph Romm

the book is copyrighted 2007.........................................


The 2014 Atlantic Hurricane Season marked the ninth consecutive year in which the U.S. did not sustain a major Category 3+ landfalling hurricane, which extends the alltime record by another year. It was also the quietest season in terms of named storms since 1997.”


Inconvenient Truths: 2014 Global Natural Disasters Down Massively! …No Trend In Tornado/Cyclones Since 1950!

Joseph J. Romm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joseph Romm, 2007
Joseph J. Romm (born June 27, 1960) is an American author, blogger, physicist[1] and climate expert[2] who advocates reducing greenhouse gas emissions and global warming and increasing energy security through energy efficiency, green energy technologies and green transportation technologies.[3] Romm is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. In 2009, Rolling Stone magazine named Romm to its list of "100 People Who Are Changing America".[4] and Time magazine named him one of its "Heroes of the Environment (2009)"

 

[Old Rocks]

And the sea level rise continues to accelerate. A whole bunch of people with actual Phd's on their wall in oceanography are providing us with evidence of that.

 

[Old Rocks]

Tropical cyclones in the northwestern Pacific have strengthened about 10 percent since the 1970s because of warming ocean temperatures, researchers report this week in Science Advances. According to an extensive analysis of historical cyclone data, nearly 65 percent of typhoons now reach category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson scale, compared with around 45 percent just decades ago.


The northwestern Pacific produces some of the world’s most intense and most devastating tropical cyclones, called typhoons in the Pacific and hurricanes in the Atlantic. The category 5 super typhoon Haiyan, for instance, had record winds that reached nearly 200 miles per hour, and the 2013 storm killed at least 6,300 people in the Philippines.




Read more: History, Travel, Arts, Science, People, Places | Smithsonian
Give the gift of Smithsonian magazine for only $12! Give the gift of Smithsonian
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter

Well, let us hope that 2017 finishes out that decade of no major hurricanes hitting the US. In the meantime, the Pacific has had an increase in the number and intensity of typhoons.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Scientists say Antarctic melting could double sea level rise. Here’s what that looks like.

And still the RW lugnuts deny...deny...deny. Thankfully, their numbers are diminishing...

to bad the continents are drinking the water


Thirsty continents are slowing down expected sea level rise, scientists say

 

[Uncensored2008]

Scientists say Antarctic melting could double sea level rise. Here’s what that looks like.

And still the RW lugnuts deny...deny...deny. Thankfully, their numbers are diminishing...

Oh my ALLAH,

HAIR ON FIRE>>>>>>!!!!!######

LOL

You fucktarded cultists couldn't produce any describable rise in oceans from the 20 years your cult of morons has made the claim.



AGW - the religion for retarded people.

 

[Wyatt earp]

<Quoting botched Salon interview>

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress

And Bear whiffs again, posting the same old flawed Hansen interview. The interviewer there admitted that he screwed it up big time and misrepresented what Hansen said.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110126_SingingInTheRain.pdf

---
Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message: "I went back to my book and reread the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later - probably because I'd been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.
---

Hansen's flooding prediction was not for "20 years from the time of the interview". It was for "40 years after a doubling of the CO2 concentration". Which was 350ppm at the time, so the clock on the 40 years starts ticking whenever 700 ppm is reached, which will be a while.

It's been known for 5 years now, that the Salon interview was botched. Deniers ... don't care. Poor Bear had no hope of knowing he was parroting a lie, because his cult leaders didn't want him to know that. Point is, poor Bear whiffed again in his quest to find some sort of failed prediction.

2. France’s foreign minister said we only have “500 days” to stop “climate chaos”
When Laurent Fabius met with Secretary of State John Kerry on May 13, 2014 to talk about world issues he said “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Ironically at the time of Fabius’ comments, the U.N. had scheduled a climate summit to meet in Paris in December 2015 — some 565 days after his remarks. Looks like the U.N. is 65 days too late to save the world.

3. President Barack Obama is the last chance to stop global warming
When Obama made the campaign promise to “slow the rise of the oceans” some environmentalists may have taken him quite literally.

In 2012, the United Nations Foundation President Tim Wirth told Climatewire that Obama’s second term was “the last window of opportunity” to impose policies to restrict fossil fuel use. Wirth said it’s “the last chance we have to get anything approaching 2 degrees Centigrade,” adding that if “we don’t do it now, we are committing the world to a drastically different place.”

Even before that, then-National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Hansen warned in 2009 that Obama only “has four years to save Earth.” I wonder what they now think about their predictions?

4. Remember when we had “hours” to stop global warming?
In 2009, world leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark to potentially hash out another climate treaty. That same year, the head of Canada’s Green Party wrote that there was only “hours” left to stop global warming.

“We have hours to act to avert a slow-motion tsunami that could destroy civilization as we know it,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Greens in Canada, wrote in 2009. “Earth has a long time. Humanity does not. We need to act urgently. We no longer have decades; we have hours. We mark that in Earth Hour on Saturday.”

5. United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown said there was only 50 days left to save Earth
2009 was a bad year for global warming predictions. That year Brown warned there was only “50 days to save the world from global warming,” the BBC reported. According to Brown there was “no plan B.”

Brown has been booted out of office since then. I wonder what he’d say about global warming today?

6. Let’s not forget Prince Charles’s warning we only had 96 months to save the planet
It’s only been about 70 months since Charles said in July 2009 that there would be “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.” So the world apparently only has 26 months left to stave off an utter catastrophe.

7. The U.N.’s top climate scientist said in 2007 we only had four years to save the world
Rajendra Pachauri, the former head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in 2007 that if “there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.”

“What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment,” he said.

Well, it’s 2015 and no new U.N. climate treaty has been presented. The only thing that’s changed since then is that Pachauri was forced to resign earlier this year amid accusations he sexually harassed multiple female coworkers.

8. Environmentalists warned in 2002 the world had a decade to go green
Environmentalist write George Monbiot wrote in the UK Guardian that within “as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world’s animals or it continues to feed the world’s people. It cannot do both.”

In 2002, about 930 million people around the world were undernourished, according to U.N. data. by 2014, that number shrank to 805 million. Sorry, Monbiot.



Read more: 25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’

 

[Wyatt earp]

<Quoting botched Salon interview>

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress

And Bear whiffs again, posting the same old flawed Hansen interview. The interviewer there admitted that he screwed it up big time and misrepresented what Hansen said.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110126_SingingInTheRain.pdf

---
Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message: "I went back to my book and reread the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later - probably because I'd been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.
---

Hansen's flooding prediction was not for "20 years from the time of the interview". It was for "40 years after a doubling of the CO2 concentration". Which was 350ppm at the time, so the clock on the 40 years starts ticking whenever 700 ppm is reached, which will be a while.

It's been known for 5 years now, that the Salon interview was botched. Deniers ... don't care. Poor Bear had no hope of knowing he was parroting a lie, because his cult leaders didn't want him to know that. Point is, poor Bear whiffed again in his quest to find some sort of failed prediction.

1) At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.”



2) The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age. --Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

3) A high-priority government report warns of climate change that will lead to floods and starvation. ‘Leading climatologists’ speak of a ‘detrimental global climatic change,’ threatening ‘the stability of most nations.’ The scenario is eerily familiar although the document — never made public before — dates from 1974. But here’s the difference: it was written to respond to the threat of global cooling, not warming. And yes, it even mentions a ‘consensus’ among scientists. -- Maurizio Morabito

4) According to His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, we only have 96 months left to save the planet.

I'm impressed. 96 months. Not 95. Not 97. July 2017. Put it in your diary. Usually the warm-mongers stick to the same old drone that we only have 10 years left to save the planet. Nice round number. Former Vice President Al Gore said we only have 10 years left 3 1/2 years ago, which makes him technically more of a pessimist than the Prince of Wales. Al's betting Armageddon kicks in January 2016 -- unless he's just peddling glib generalities. -- Mark Steyn



5) ABC Science Show presenter Robyn Williams panics about global warming:
Andrew Bolt: I ask you, Robyn, 100 metres [of sea level rises] in the next century...do you really think that?

Robyn Williams: It is possible, yes.

It is possible, no, actually.

Now Glaciologist Nikolai Osokin of the Russian Academy of Science reassures Williams about global warming:

If all ice on the earth melted, the level of the oceans would rise by 64 meters. Many coastal cities would be under water, and so would the Netherlands, a significant part of which lies below sea level. However, the Dutch and the rest of the planet may rest assured: this hypothetical catastrophe could not take place anytime within the next thousand years



6) The UK faces a "catastrophe" of floods, droughts and killer heatwaves if world leaders fail to agree to a deal on climate change, the prime minister has warned.
Gordon Brown said negotiators had 50 days to save the world from global warming and break the "impasse."

He told the Major Economies Forum in London, which brings together 17 of the world's biggest greenhouse gas-emitting countries, there was "no plan B". -- October 19, 2009

 

[westwall]

And another whiff. Westwall gives us 107 examples of ...

1. Predictions that came true
2. Predictions that weren't actually made, having been ripped screaming out of context.
3. Predictions made by people who weren't climate scientists
4. Predictions made by a single scientist that didn't represent any sort of consensus.

So, we've still got deniers unable to show even a single case of a consensus climate science prediction being wrong.

What will it take for you deniers to stop deflecting and admit your "scientists have been wrong" nonsense is merely a dishonest mantra that the denier religion orders its acolytes to chant?

Really? Which one of those predictions came true?

January and February of this year have been the warmest ever recorded. That does look like a warmer winter, now doesn't it. Dry summers? Oregon and Washington just had a summer where the fires were so intense that they did not try to save the forests, instead they were trying to save the small towns. Damned near lost three of them in my home area.

Pure and utter bullshit. The temperature record has provably been altered to make that statement. How about the NOAA report from 1998 that stated the global temperature at 62 degrees? Does that one suddenly disappear because it interferes with your lie?

 

[westwall]

Mr. Westwall, you are one silly ass. Even the equations we use in physics are nothing but models of the real world, and many come with warnings concerning the parameters for which they can be used with any accuracy. And, when you are using models created by past observations, and the world is in the process of change, then those models are no longer that accurate, because the parameters are changing.

Now you have in the past referred to the Maunder Minimum for predicting a cooling. What was that but a prediction based on a model? And a very poor one as we can see from the last two years and the present year.

Untrue. Equations tell you EXACTLY what is going to occur if you do A+B the product is ALWAYS C. That's what it means to be an exact science. Something that climatology is not.

What science do you believe is an "exact" one?

Definition of an exact science.....

1. any scientific field in which accurate quantitive techniques are used and there are accurate means of testing hypotheses and repeating results ⇒ Mathematics is an exact science.

Definition of “exact science” | Collins English Dictionary

 

[mamooth]

Ha try this one ***** I have the book right in front of me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, page 30

"I would not bet that the Mississippi Gulf Coast will get hit by a super hurricane in any particular year, but I certainly plan on it being hit again sometime over the next ten years:I wouldn't be surprised if it where hit by more then one" Joesph Romm

the book is copyrighted 2007.........................................

And it's not a prediction. It's a statement of probability.

Keep trying, Bear. Maybe someday, you'll figure out what a prediction is.

 

[westwall]

Really? Which one of those predictions came true?

"Milder and wetter winters", for example.

Where have they been milder? And how exactly is that predictive? In some areas it has been milder while in others it has been harsher. Far harsher than normal. In other words it is non falsifiable. What is the other name for a non falsifiable science?

Here's a hint...

Science and Pseudo-Science

Popper described the demarcation problem as the “key to most of the fundamental problems in the philosophy of science” (Popper 1962, 42). He rejected verifiability as a criterion for a scientific theory or hypothesis to be scientific, rather than pseudoscientific or metaphysical. Instead he proposed as a criterion that the theory be falsifiable, or more precisely that “statements or systems of statements, in order to be ranked as scientific, must be capable of conflicting with possible, or conceivable observations” (Popper 1962, 39).


Science and Pseudo-Science (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[westwall]

Ha try this one ***** I have the book right in front of me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, page 30

"I would not bet that the Mississippi Gulf Coast will get hit by a super hurricane in any particular year, but I certainly plan on it being hit again sometime over the next ten years:I wouldn't be surprised if it where hit by more then one" Joesph Romm

the book is copyrighted 2007.........................................

And it's not a prediction. It's a statement of probability.

Keep trying, Bear. Maybe someday, you'll figure out what a prediction is.

Wow. You dance hard but not well. Share with us the definition of "statement of probability". I'll wait.

 

[Crick]

Most Floridians plan on being struck by a hurricane every season. We don't get hit every season, but we still plan on it.

Idiot.

 

[mamooth]

1) At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned,

Not a climate scientist. In fact, he's a hard core denier.

2) The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age. --Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

Not a climate scientist. Kenneth Watt was a zoologist.

3) A high-priority government report warns of climate change that will lead to floods and starvation. ‘Leading climatologists’ speak of a ‘detrimental global climatic change,’ threatening ‘the stability of most nations.’ The scenario is eerily familiar although the document — never made public before — dates from 1974. But here’s the difference: it was written to respond to the threat of global cooling, not warming. And yes, it even mentions a ‘consensus’ among scientists. -- Maurizio Morabito

That's an mystery rumor speaking of unnamed people, not a prediction.

4) According to His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, we only have 96 months left to save the planet.

Obviously not a climate scientist. And probably not an inaccurate statement, as it was speaking of preventing events in the far future, not in those 96 months. Do try to read for comprehension, eh?

5) ABC Science Show presenter Robyn Williams panics about global warming:

Obviously not a climate scientist.

6) The UK faces a "catastrophe" of floods, droughts and killer heatwaves if world leaders fail to agree to a deal on climate change, the prime minister has warned.
Gordon Brown said negotiators had 50 days to save the world from global warming and break the "impasse."

Obviously not a climate scientist. And again, not an inaccurate statement, as it's speaking of the far future, not 50 days.

So, still not a single wrong consensus prediction from climate scientists. But keep trying. I'm sure you have additional vast numbers of people who aren't climate scientists making predictions, and you'll keep posting them here.

Here's a thought. Why don't you go to the IPCC reports and show the failed predictions? If things are as you say, those reports should be full of failed predictions. Yet oddly, you haven't quoted anything from the IPCC.

 

[mamooth]

Wow. You dance hard but not well. Share with us the definition of "statement of probability". I'll wait.

Sure thing.

I'll predict that of 6 coin flips, it's likely about half will be heads.

If 5 end up as heads, that doesn't mean the statement of probability is wrong.

And someone who wasn't hilariously ignorant of statistics would understand that.

Oh, Caltech called. They want you to stop associating yourself with them, due to the embarrassment you cause them.

 

[mamooth]

Where have they been milder?

Most of the world. Do keep up with temperature trends.

And how exactly is that predictive?

It says winter temperature trends will go up. They have.

In other words it is non falsifiable.

It's entirely falsifiable, because it's real science. If average global winter temperatures went down, it would be falsified. Climate science makes many falsifiable predictions. Instead of being falsified, they all keep being confirmed.

What is the other name for a non falsifiable science?

Denialism.

There's literally nothing that could falsify your denialist beliefs. When something does falsify them, you simply declare the data is faked. Hence, it's clear denialism is pseudoscience. Superstition. Religion.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Really? Which one of those predictions came true?

"Milder and wetter winters", for example.

<Quoting botched Salon interview>

While doing research 12 or 13 years ago, I met Jim Hansen, the scientist who in 1988 predicted the greenhouse effect before Congress

And Bear whiffs again, posting the same old flawed Hansen interview. The interviewer there admitted that he screwed it up big time and misrepresented what Hansen said.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110126_SingingInTheRain.pdf

---
Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message: "I went back to my book and reread the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later - probably because I'd been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.
---

Hansen's flooding prediction was not for "20 years from the time of the interview". It was for "40 years after a doubling of the CO2 concentration". Which was 350ppm at the time, so the clock on the 40 years starts ticking whenever 700 ppm is reached, which will be a while.

It's been known for 5 years now, that the Salon interview was botched. Deniers ... don't care. Poor Bear had no hope of knowing he was parroting a lie, because his cult leaders didn't want him to know that. Point is, poor Bear whiffed again in his quest to find some sort of failed prediction.

Ha try this one ***** I have the book right in front of me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, page 30

"I would not bet that the Mississippi Gulf Coast will get hit by a super hurricane in any particular year, but I certainly plan on it being hit again sometime over the next ten years:I wouldn't be surprised if it where hit by more then one" Joesph Romm

the book is copyrighted 2007.........................................


The 2014 Atlantic Hurricane Season marked the ninth consecutive year in which the U.S. did not sustain a major Category 3+ landfalling hurricane, which extends the alltime record by another year. It was also the quietest season in terms of named storms since 1997.”


Inconvenient Truths: 2014 Global Natural Disasters Down Massively! …No Trend In Tornado/Cyclones Since 1950!

Joseph J. Romm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Joseph Romm, 2007
Joseph J. Romm (born June 27, 1960) is an American author, blogger, physicist[1] and climate expert[2] who advocates reducing greenhouse gas emissions and global warming and increasing energy security through energy efficiency, green energy technologies and green transportation technologies.[3] Romm is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. In 2009, Rolling Stone magazine named Romm to its list of "100 People Who Are Changing America".[4] and Time magazine named him one of its "Heroes of the Environment (2009)"

Oh yea forgot the picture on my phone..

 

[mamooth]

I lied? About what? Please name the specific lie.

Oh wait. This is just you having a meltdown over how badly you're getting spanked. You're not even going to pretend to address my posts any more. Instead, you're just going to throw these tantrums. Do you think you're the first denier to act that way? I carve another notch whenever it happens.

 

[Old Rocks]

By 2030, it is very probable that Glacier National Park will have no glaciers. Yet, if they have one snowfield left that lasts over the summer, those in denial of reality will claim that disproves the whole of global warming, even though when the park was established, there were over 150 glaciers. And if Mr. Westwall lasts that long, he will be the first in line to make the denial, even though, as someone claiming a Phd in Geology, he really should know the differance between a snow field and a glacier.

And the water from all the alpine glaciers ends up in the sea.