Oh Max,
You really are shameless. Two years pushing and lying about the math and then just changes his story and expects everyone to simply forget his previous idiocy

MHAZE, sorry but please show me where I lied? AFAIK it all started wit this post nearly 3 years ago. I never claimed I had run the numbers myself: just that like any adult that respects experts outside of their own field of training, I accepted the peer-reviewed science of the IPCC. (However, I did have concerns at the time that the science was saying we should aim lower than 2 degrees and only the politics of the IPCC had pushed that up to 2.)
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18793#334973

________________________________________

Bazz,
Do the math buddy!

Limit = 2 degrees: IPCC says we can’t go above 2 degrees or we get into feedbacks
565 gigatons tons CO2 allowance before we get to 2 degrees
Therefore the 2,795 gigatons fossil fuel reserves are 5 times more than we should burn
That means 80% of the fossil fuels on the books of companies today should never be mined!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuCGVwJIRd0
________________________________________

Where did I ever say I had run the climate sensitivity models myself that arrived at the 2 degrees limit? You're the liar here pal!

This is when you came in and embarrassed yourself by ranting about the range as if it was flat, without a bell curve favouring 3 degrees! http://tinyurl.com/ulnfnlh

I mean, it's like you didn't even start with the basic WIKI!

"However the positive skew, which is also found in other studies, suggests that if carbon dioxide concentrations double, the probability of very large increases in temperature is greater than the probability of very small increases."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_sensitivity

Show us where you demonstrated understanding of the probability curve in the ECS results or YOU'RE the liar here buddy!

(I'm getting real tired of you acting like a whining little piss-ant. You're boring me! Just admit you didn't have a clue about the probabilities and it's OK, I can forgive that. I'm not so sure about it if you actually did know but just decided to mislead us all though.)

Basically, with the level of threat we're seeing in the science, I can't believe adults like you even exist? What's wrong with you?

RECORD all time hottest coldest driest wettest , the list is long BUT highlighting some things that are not the current record?
And ignoring the fact most current records are from the last decade, even year some times
Feeble way to try to prove something

Watched the ABC DRUM tonight for a few minutes, they were blaming the Governments for the smoke pollution. That the Australian Government did not agree to further reduce its 2% CO2. As though that would stop bush fires. The Presenters of the ABC should be sacked as incompetent as know it all: know nothings. If they want to talk about climate then put a scientist who studies the subject, not uninformed journalists.

Would you listen to the scientist?

Yes Max.
carbon-sense.com/index.php?s=Guy+Leblanc+Smith&Submit=Go

From: Dr Guy LeBlanc Smith
To: Professor Flannery, The Australian Climate Commission
I would like to submit the following questions to the Climate Commission Ipswich Public Forum on April 7th:
As a retired Principal Research Scientist with CSIRO with a doctorate in sedimentary geology and ancient environmental reconstructions that show climate has always varied naturally – I would like to know the following:
(1) Why has Professor Garnaut not honoured his first term of reference of his review – to show human causation in climate change – he has not yet differentiated human from natural, why?
(2) By how much will global temperature change if Australian human carbon dioxide generation were to totally cease and how much would that cost us? – this is designed to show a base line calibration.
(3) Will you publish graphs of annual global temperature reduction delivered from the proposed Australian carbon tax amount by years – for example say for the next 100 years?
Thanks in anticipation of a focused and evidence backed response.