Tony,153
>'As soon as you provide a link to research facts that proves global warming is a hoax, "

Another example of Misrepresentation and the the continual dishonesty of the Climate Cultists. Just making up stuff and saying I said it. It's all the climate cultists have left.

You still avoid dealing with what's relevant to policy analysis.

Grim replied to me:
>”This from a man who consistently prefers to get his science from the Heartland institute, funded almost entirely by the Koch brothers and other major polluters, and refuses to accept any evidence offered by virtually every credible scientific institution in the world...”

Please quote the examples to support your strawman assertion.

This is another example of the strawman arguments and intellectual dishonesty frequently displayed by the Climate Cultists.

Have you no personal, professional or intellectual integrity whatsoever?

http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/booklets/warming_world_final.pdf

“In general, each 1°C of global temperature increase can be expected to produce: “

“• 5-10% changes in stream flow across many river basins”
(15-30%)

“• 5-15% reductions in the yields of crops as currently grown”
(15-45%)

“• 200-400% increases in the area burned by wildfire in parts of the western United States”
(600-1200%)

Figures in brackets are for a 3°C rise which is very likely by 2100.

Europe Similar to above this time base is for 2°C warming

Typical 20 year heat waves will see temperatures soar by 4° in regions such as Spain, Portugal, France and the Balkans taking these events well over 40°C

Flooding
“Northern Europe is likely to see more rain in both winter and summer. Central Europe will receive more rain in winter but less in summer, while southern Europe could see summer rainfall decrease by as much as a fifth.”

Asia Africa and Middle East

http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/06/19/what-climate-change-means-africa-asia-coastal-poor

The major problems are the reduction in food production due to increased temperatures and sea level rise inundating important food producing areas, such as the Mekong delta.

The current world population is 7 billion but on current projections we will have another 3 billion people to feed by 2100, so we will have to feed 42% more people while coping with a 30% reduction in yield.

On uncertainty if you know you are going crash, but uncertain whether going to crash at 60 or 90 Kph you would be wise to put on your seat belt.

The science is settled is it, ant? “the Royal society stated that: “Any public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect —“
http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/this-issue/climate-change/royal-society-issues-revised-statement-on-climate-change.html
That was rhe President of the Royal Society five years ago. The current president believes in consensus, and is a fraud-backer, but even he makes no assertion that the science is settled. This is another statement by you completely unsupported by any science or evidence.

"Widely agreed issues include the following:

Surface temperatures have warmed by 0.8C since 1850 in two bursts, one between 1910 and 1940 and the other from 1975 to around 2000.

Global average carbon dioxide concentrations have increased from around 280ppm in the mid-nineteenth century to around 388ppm by the end of 2009; and are higher than any observed in the last 800,000 years.

The net human climate forcing is around 1.6W/sq.m; this level of forcing will lead to a 0.4C average surface warming.

The relationship between carbon dioxide levels and the climate is active so that changes in either will affect the other."

http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/this-issue/climate-change/royal-society-issues-revised-statement-on-climate-change.html

While there is always room for new knowledge, the Royal Society concludes that the main issues: the Earth is warming and human activities that put additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere are widely agreed.

Oh dear, more fraud backers.

Hi Don,
One last posting (probably). If you really wish Climate Change to go away, metaphorically, rather than playing scrabble word games (where can I find a place to insert uncertainty bombs), you should try to invalidate some or all of the following statements (a subset of hundreds of such statement):

1. 1896 research by Svante August Arrhenius showing that doubling CO2 in the atmosphere would raise the surface temperature of the world by 4C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius

2. NOAA showing increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html#global_growth

3. NASA CO2 concentration graph showing current CO2 levels to be much higher than it has been for at least 400,000 years
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

4. Increasing mean temperatures for Australia between 1910 and 2013
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/index.shtml#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries

5. Decreasing Arctic ice from 1979 to 2014
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

6. Climate change may have impacted the severity of Cyclone Sandy
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/can-we-link-hurricane-sandy-to-climate-change-98794096/?no-ist

7. With regard to Qld floods in 2011: “A warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture and will most likely increase the intensity of extreme rainfall events”
http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Environment/Australian-Landscapes/Understanding-Floods.aspx

8. Satellite measurement show that less heat is leaving the earth than is incoming from the sun, resulting in the earth warming
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page7.php

9. For the recent and unprecedented floods in England: There is also an increasing body of evidence that shows that extreme daily rainfall rates are becoming more intense, and that the rate of increase is consistent with what is expected from the fundamental physics of a warming world.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/2014/uk-storms-and-floods

10. Climate Change may have played a role in the Syrian uprising, resulting in war
http://scienceblogs.com/significantfigures/index.php/2013/06/10/syria-water-climate-change-and-violent-conflict/

11. Climate change is responsible for more frequent and larger forest fires, such as the ones now plaguing the Canadian Northwest Territories
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/tornadoes-of-fire-in-n-w-t-linked-to-climate-change-1.2706131

Cheers, Tony

In all this continual, boring repetition of the mantra about down-in-the-weeds science details we've been hearing for the past >20 years, the Climate Cultists still don't get it. This stuff is irrelevant for policy analysis. They are continually bashing their heads against a wall repeating their mantra. They just don't understand what is important.

Until they can listen to the questions the realists/rationalists need answers to, and address them, the Climate Cultists will continue to yap among themselves, and preach to their own crowd of 'true believers'. They wont persuade rationalists until they can address the rationalist's concerns. For example, the proposed policies will not make the slightest different to the climate but will do great harm to humanity by damaging the economy of any countries unwise enough to implement them.