The Forum > General Discussion > Rajendra Pachauri Warms the Skeptics
Rajendra Pachauri Warms the Skeptics
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 17
- 18
- 19
-
- All
Posted by csteele, Saturday, 23 February 2013 1:40:47 PM
| |
SPQR,
Yes, God bless the ABC and others. They will need time to adjust and get their “stories” straight. The socialization of science takes a while and in the meantime they seem to have opted for censorship. We are fortunate in Australia that we have an election this year. Looking at the betting it seems we can dispatch the ALP, the CO2 Tax and the Department of Climate Change with one foul stroke of the electoral Hockey Stick. The warmertariat are out of ammo but I’m sure they will come up with more scary stories. After this election we should get Tim Flannery to hand pick freshly redundant warmers and make them visit every school in Australia to reverse for our children, all the frightening stories they have inflicted upon them. The latest tally of new skeptical recruits now includes; The Hadley Centre/CRU records show no warming for 18 years (v.3) or 19 years (v.4), The RSS satellite dataset shows no warming for 23 years (h/t to Werner Brozek for determining these values). IPCC’s climate “science” panel has admitted there has been no global warming for 17 years, London Met Office admits no warming for 17 years James Hansen, NASA’s GISS is in agreement Hadley Centre/CRU findings. Better late than never I guess but I can’t help thinking that from say 2002 to 2012, when the developed nations were responding to their threats by gutting their industrial capacity and economies, these toads knew they were wrong and would never have come clean without the persistent challenges from real science. We should throw the lot in gaol. The only one missing in action is Michael Mann. Perhaps he fears we might flog him with his own “hockey stick”? What an embarrassing schmuck! Posted by spindoc, Saturday, 23 February 2013 1:49:23 PM
| |
sonofgloin,
Do you consider that the science is settled...because scientists do not. They are the skeptics (as opposed to "skeptics"). Why do you consider it bad form to re-analyse as more and better data becomes available? Regarding the hockey-stick, I'll reprise this article in which Michael Mann discusses that issue amongst other things. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/climate_scientist_michael_mann_fights_back_against_skeptics/2516/ "Widespread bad-faith assaults on science have no place in a functioning democracy..." There is no "lie". There are cliches habitually sprayed about by denialists - and there is the politicisation of science by those who which to maintain the status quo. Posted by Poirot, Saturday, 23 February 2013 1:54:26 PM
| |
So if frogs are heard near sonofgloin's window when it rains, who needs all that bothersome science and research?
Obviously they can be heard all the way from the Amazon, Asia and central Europe. That settles it for me! Posted by wobbles, Saturday, 23 February 2013 2:10:38 PM
| |
The key here is simple : whether or not Rajendra Pashauri is accurately reported.
Poirot and CSteele as is their usual habit whenever someone introduces anything challenging to one of their pet theory’s go into the wounded bird (goose?) routine in an endeavor to lead the danger away from the nest. It matters not one iota what Poirot’s ABC or The conversation links might say about sea ice or nasty comments, or what CSteele can cherry pick from a Met report, or that Wobbles is playing with his pet frog, again. Did Rajendra Pashauri say what is reported --yes or no? Posted by SPQR, Saturday, 23 February 2013 2:40:38 PM
| |
Who cares, we have it on good authority he's only a railway engineer.
Posted by qanda, Saturday, 23 February 2013 2:51:32 PM
|
Spindoc starts with;
“This trend would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” he suggests to break the long term global warming trend.”. Question my friend, did he actually say the very words “30 to 40 years at least” as you suggest or not?
Then we have the British Met predictions.
“Taking into account the range of uncertainty in the forecast and observations, it is very likely that 2013 will be one of the warmest ten years in the record which goes back to 1850, and it is likely to be warmer than 2012.”
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2012/2013-global-forecast
You would have us turf out the very good global warming science on such a prediction? Way balmier than I had thought possible.
You know how the hull of a sailing ship disappears below the horizon well before the mast and sails are gone...well just think about it for a moment lads.