I wish they'd make up their minds. Global warming, Global Freezing.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34242705/ns/technology_and_science-science/

It all evens out in the end.

I wonder why they're still building those Islands communities in Dubai. Do they know something? Most of the Middle East is less than 3 meters above Sea Level.

I am wary of predictions of substantial sea level rises over the next 100 years. The National Tidal Centre data shows a period between about 1935 and 1950 during which the results are similar to the results since the early nineties. The information can be examined by reading section 3.2.2 at the site below and consideration of the accompanying PDO chart for the period 1900-2008.
http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO60202/IDO60202.2009.pdf
We shouldn't be wasting fossil carbon. It is too important for the living standards of our children and grandchildren.
Humans had burned plenty of carbon by 1950 but the chart above shows low sea levels between 1950 to 1970.

Believe in what I say and put your money in the collection plate or you'll burn in hell for eternity.

Believe in what we say and hand over tax-payer billions or your children will suffer droughts, floods and famines.

Sounds like religion to me.

“This is not a political issue, or a scientific issue or a psychological issue – it’s a moral issue.
If anything it’s actually a spiritual issue.” Al Gore

Even Uncle Al thinks it's a religion.

Is the increasing shrillness and urgency designed to obscure climategate and set the political-economic future in stone before the punters catch on?

The same scientists who “estimated” the extent of global warming are now “estimating’ that it is worse than they thought.

No proof – just estimates.

It is obvious that, this close to Copenhagen, the more frenzied will be the alarmist’s shrieks.

In the meantime, the scientists who disagree with such things as the rise in sea levels have not dramatised their findings to keep up with the hysterics.

One wonders what a “tipping point” is: the end of the world as we know it, or just another scare-mongering exaggeration from a bunch of drama queens.

It is noticed that the ‘cast of thousands’ who keep coming up with more dramatic warnings has now slumped to 26.

As for some unknown Canadian saying that the abandonment of a binding treaty at Copenhagen is ‘unacceptable’, perhaps world leaders like more and more of the people they are supposed to be leading, want proof of the efficacy of some of the you beaut plans, such as the one Rudd tried to perpetrate on the Australian people. Not all countries have ego- maniacs for PM’s and Presidents. The unknown Weaver used the same “You know what?” expression as Adolf Rudd continually uses.

Democracy has prevailed in Australia; the US has decided not to go to Copenhagen with a plan, and the “promises” of Korea and Brazil cannot be kept without the ruination of their economies.

A lot more discussion and less secretive ‘we know best’ from people merely claiming things is needed before anyone can do anything.

It seems crazy to note that the real world observations don't fit the current theory of climate change (which is expressed through the models) and then resolve to push even harder with the current theory.

The current climate models obviously do not have all the correct variables and equations to predict what is really happening with the climate.

One example of a theory needing more consideration is that of changes in regional climate due to anthropic changes in land use. These include massive deforestation, especially of tropical rainforests and the continuing urbanisation of the planet's population on every continent. The reduced capacity of these regions to absorb heat energy results in the surplus heat energy being redirected to the cooler areas of the planet and the ice melts.

The IPCC are losing credibility because they appear blinkered to any explanations other than greenhouse gas accumulations; a dog with a “greenhouse gas” bone, unwilling to give it up for something even better.

Common sense demands the IPCC let go of their preconceived ideas and have a “back to basics” rethink of the issue. They should stop forging ahead with current ideas and policy recommendations to governments. The more time the IPCC, Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong spend travelling down the wrong path, the less time we will have to effectively deal with the real problems our planet is facing.

In the Australian on the 18th April 2009 and on the ABC website April 20th 2009 had stories reporting Ian Allison, head of the Australian Antarctic Division, saying that Antarctic ice cover was stable if not increasing in East Antarctica.
It is really becoming a game of trumps at the moment.
I noticed that the Copenhagen Consensus included Stefan Ramsdorf that well know colleague of Profs Jones and Mann.
Even some of his emails made it into the CRU data download.
Surely there are more than just 24 glaciologist in the world, hopefully not beholden to the IPCC.