- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 14,966
- Reaction score
- 2,154
The same "science" that says gender is a "social construct"?
Nope.The same "science" that says gender is a "social construct"?
In an interview with CNBC on Monday, US Energy Secretary Rick Perry said that carbon dioxide emissions from human activities aren't the primary driver of climate change. Instead, the former Texas governor responded that "most likely the primary control knob is the ocean waters and this environment that we live in."
It’s unclear how Perry envisions this “control knob” and how it works; a generous analysis of his answer would be that he misunderstood the question.
...
Oddly, Perry continued by affirming that climate change is happening and that we have to do something about it. The secretary told CNBC, “The fact is, this shouldn't be a debate about 'Is the climate changing? Is man having an effect on it?' Yeah, we are.
A new paper just published in the Journal of Climate is a stunning setback for the darling of cherry-picking for contrarian scientists and elected officials. Let’s walk though this so we appreciate the impact.
The vast majority of scientists know that the climate is changing, humans are the main reason, and there are going to be severe consequences. We have decades of measurements that prove our understanding of this process. There is simply no debate or dispute.
Despite this, there are a shrinking number of contrarian scientists, elected officials, and industry representatives that have spent endless time trying to downplay the impact. They have variously argued that the climate isn’t changing, that the changes won’t be very much, or that there are no viable solutions to the problem. Much of their position relies upon finding evidence that the current observations of warming are not great. That is, the Earth is not warming as fast as predictions.
To support this incorrect (and intellectually dishonest) position, contrarians have scoured the data for any evidence at all that suggests the Earth is not warming.
---
For those who only follow climate science on the periphery, they may have heard phrases like “global warming stopped 15 years ago,” “climate models got it wrong,” “we don’t really know if it is warming,” etc. There is now no reason whatsoever to believe these claims. We who work in the field knew these assertions were baseless, but now hopefully the people making them will retract.
From the Nasa Report
Zwally’s team calculated that the mass gain from the thickening of East Antarctica remained steady from 1992 to 2008 at 200 billion tons per year, while the ice losses from the coastal regions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula increased by 65 billion tons per year.
“The good news is that Antarctica is not currently contributing to sea level rise, but is taking 0.23 millimeters per year away,” Zwally said. “But this is also bad news. If the 0.27 millimeters per year of sea level rise attributed to Antarctica in the IPCC report is not really coming from Antarctica, there must be some other contribution to sea level rise that is not accounted for.”
So... according to the MODELS these guys used, which is to say 66% of the MODELS in a particular recognised standard set of many MODELS, after adjustments - these guys figured that IF WE CUT BACK CARBON OUTPUT AS PER THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD, we could see a mere 1.5C WARMING instead of 2C WARMING - if they are correct.Global warming fraudsters are being forced to admit they are just making shit up as they go.
Some commentary on this:So... according to the MODELS these guys used, which is to say 66% of the MODELS in a particular recognised standard set of many MODELS, after adjustments - these guys figured that IF WE CUT BACK CARBON OUTPUT AS PER THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD, we could see a mere 1.5C WARMING instead of 2C WARMING - if they are correct.
I see.
potholer54 - thought I recognised his voice.Some commentary on this:
So the story is not that climate change is false, but that we might still have a chance of avoiding total disaster.Some commentary on this:
Yes, I've been a subscriber to his channel for years. He isn't always bang on but usually does a good job of pointing out bullshit.potholer54 - thought I recognised his voice.
.... outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
... or that the methods being used to combat the problem are bunk.