2013 IPCC Climate Change Report Leak - Warming predictions changed from previous

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by Masbee, Sep 14, 2013.

  1. Masbee

    Masbee -- Rookie of the Year

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Estimated Increases in Temperature 70 years from now:

    2007 Report:
    Very Likely warming of 1 to 3 degrees Celsius.

    2013 Report:
    Likely warming of 1 to 2.5 degrees Celsius.

    Lots more at the link:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324549004579067532485712464.html#articleTabs=article


    Dialing back on the catastrophic disaster predictions as the more time goes on the more the "models" that have been used look like utter shit.

    Strange that all this time there have been careful critics of the models used and their theory, design, application, data feeds, and execution - and yet have been shouted down for years. Why?
     
  2. oldguy

    oldguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,817
    Likes Received:
    78
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Because the President says it's all true.

    Go Blazers
     
  3. julius

    julius Global Moderator Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    42,401
    Likes Received:
    29,999
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    singer songwriter
    Location:
    Washington
    you guys do realize that warming of 1 to 2 degrees in 70 years is still a big deal, right?

    (and in other words, I think that's between 1.8 and 3.6 degrees increase in F, which makes more sense to us)
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2013
  4. BlazerWookee

    BlazerWookee UNTILT THE DAMN PINWHEEL!

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    12,797
    Likes Received:
    5,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Gear Finisher
    Location:
    Lebanon, Oregon
    Because money.
     
  5. Masbee

    Masbee -- Rookie of the Year

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Except for this, MILD warming is actually GOOD for many human environments all around planet earth.

    Some places would get "better" and some "worse", just like what happened during the last natural mini ice age.

    If the warming that happened was mild enough, the net gains/losses could be equal. Very much in the arena of plausible even within the IPCC new report.

    The only way to get 8 Billion people to give up "cheap" energy (cheap is relative in that coal, oil, etc. is expensive, and extremely expensive for those in poverty around the world), and yet non carbon energy is multiples more expensive and would cost world economies Trillions upon Trillions and kill millions or even billions if the world governments forced a quick transition to non carbon energy - the best energy we have right now.

    If we have a "pause", which we do, and if the (much criticized) models are being readjusted downward, as they are, the policy options open up. The Al Gore, gloom and doom, we have submit to a really crazy and expensive and gives us all the power over you now or we will all die Plan, looks now as insane as it was then.

    Instead, how about come up with a way to compensate those who suffer due to climate change, maybe with a tax on countries who experience increased crop yields (the winners in the climate change lottery), another plan to deal with changes in water supplies, and at the same time fund a manhattan project to more quickly get advanced low carbon output energy sources functioning - meaning much cheaper than carbon energy and then they will be adopted.
     
  6. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I'm sure they got it right this time!

    /greenfont
     
  7. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Drudge has two articles linked together. One talking about massive growth in arctic sea ice. The other, algore telling us in 2007 the earth has a fever and the ice would all be gone by 2013.

    Of course algore is no scientist, but he was worthy of a Nobel, awarded by these IPCC sycophants. He was citing what he deemed to be convincing and settled science in that speech.

    Oooooooops?
     
  8. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,059
    Likes Received:
    8,157
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    All I know is that in the 70s and 80s I wore a long-sleeved sweatshirt all through the summer, but since the 90s it has been too hot to do so. Back then I owned not even one short-sleeved shirt. I moved to Bellingham in 1974.

    One more thing I know for sure. I've lived in this house since 1994, and it used to be very hard to mow the lawn in September, much less October, since the rain began in late August. It is now dry almost every day a month longer than it used to be, and each year gets noticeably later. This summer it was so dry I didn't have to cut it from early July till a week ago. That is much worse than last summer, which was noticeably different from the summer before, etc. Weeds take over from grass when the grass doesn't grow.

    Actually there's another thing I know. Snow used to be predictable. There were always 2-3 long ones (sitting on the ground 2 weeks before melting) and 2-3 short ones (1-2 days before melting). For the last few years snows have become, year by year, fewer and shorter. To the point that last winter, there were ZERO long snows and ZERO short ones.

    It was shocking because each year the trend has been so obvious, but still hasn't reach a limit. I keep expecting it to stay the same for a year, but each year is hotter, less rain, less snow. Personalities change with hotter weather. People yell in the neighborhood now. Strangers in the parking lot act like they do in California. The mellow vibe I used to love about the Northwest is dying.
     
  9. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    In the 70s, the consensus was we were about to have a new ice age.

    What was the population of Bellingham then and now?
     
  10. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    It's at least a 100% miss on a "model" that was supposed to be accurate, and policy was supposed to be set on it. If these clowns are admitting that large of an error, I assume that they are still erring on the side of "OH SHIT WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE" over anything else.

    Dupes and morons still buy this stuff, IMO.
     
  11. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    Al Gore is basically Jimmy Swaggart, except Gore was smart enough to have political power before his scam to make millions, which makes him even more of a prick.
     
  12. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow Resident OT Section Crank

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,079
    Likes Received:
    509
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Al Gore makes a movie and all of a sudden we are unable to have a rational discussion on pollution.
     
  13. Masbee

    Masbee -- Rookie of the Year

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why are you talking about weather in a climate change thread?

    You do know the difference right?
     
  14. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    algore's movie dates previous predictions made by the settled science. Such as by 2013 there'd be no ice in the arctic at all. Now we have a chance to see if their dire predictions come true.

    I'm all for dealing with pollution as long as we use reasonable means.

    I read yesterday that if the US stopped using fossil fuel completely that it would make .08 degrees difference in projected future warming. That's in the IPCC report, supposedly (I didn't read it yet, it is like 600 pages). I may be off in that .08 degrees - it may really be .008 degrees, my memory isn't as great as it used to be ;)

    My position is that to save .08 degrees of warming, it is not worth spending tens of $trillions of dollars remaking society so it doesn't use fossil fuel.
     
  15. bluefrog

    bluefrog Go Blazers, GO!

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,964
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Programmer
    Location:
    New Bern
    Not true
     
  16. julius

    julius Global Moderator Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    42,401
    Likes Received:
    29,999
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    singer songwriter
    Location:
    Washington
    just as dupes and morons still believe that a temperature increase of almost 3 degrees (that's what 2 degrees C means in F) in 70 years time isn't anything to get alarmed over.
     
  17. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    [​IMG]

    http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/dr-holdrens-ice-age-tidal-wave/?_r=0

    As a long-time student of John P. Holdren’s gloomy visions of the future, like his warnings about global famines and resource shortages, I can’t resist passing along another one that has just been dug up. This one was made in 1971, long before Dr. Holdren came President Obama’s science adviser, in an essay just unearthed by zombietime (a blog that has been republishing excerpts of his past writings). In the 1971 essay, “Overpopulation and the Potential for Ecocide,” Dr. Holdren and his co-author, the ecologist Paul Ehrlich, warned of a coming ice age.

    They certainly weren’t the only scientists in the 1970s to warn of a coming ice age, but I can’t think of any others who were so creative in their catastrophizing. Although they noted that the greenhouse effect from rising emissions of carbon dioxide emissions could cause future warming of the planet, they concluded from the mid-century cooling trend that the consequences of human activities (like industrial soot, dust from farms, jet exhaust, urbanization and deforestation) were more likely to first cause an ice age. Dr. Holdren and Dr. Ehrlich wrote:

    The effects of a new ice age on agriculture and the supportability of large human populations scarcely need elaboration here. Even more dramatic results are possible, however; for instance, a sudden outward slumping in the Antarctic ice cap, induced by added weight, could generate a tidal wave of proportions unprecedented in recorded history.

    But that would just be the beginning. Dr. Holdren and Dr. Ehrlich continued:

    If man survives the comparatively short-term threat of making the planet too cold, there is every indication he is quite capable of making it too warm not long thereafter. For the remaining major means of interference with the global heat balance is the release of energy from fossil and nuclear fuels. As pointed out previously, all this energy is ultimately degraded to heat. What are today scattered local effects of its disposition will in time, with the continued growth of population and energy consumption, give way to global warming. … Again, the exact form such consequences might take is unknown; the melting of the ice caps with a concomitant 150-foot increase in sea level might be one of them.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/sep/19/inside-the-beltway-69748548/

    NASA scientist James E. Hansen, who has publicly criticized the Bush administration for dragging its feet on climate change and labeled skeptics of man-made global warming as distracting “court jesters,” appears in a 1971 Washington Post article that warns of an impending ice age within 50 years.

    “U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming,” blares the headline of the July 9, 1971, article, which cautions readers that the world “could be as little as 50 or 60 years away from a disastrous new ice age, a leading atmospheric scientist predicts.”

    The scientist was S.I.Rasool, a colleague of Mr. Hansen’s at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The article goes on to say that Mr. Rasool came to his chilling conclusions by resorting in part to a new computer program developed by Mr. Hansen that studied clouds above Venus.

    The 1971 article, discovered this week by Washington resident John Lockwood while he was conducting related research at the Library of Congress, says that “in the next 50 years” — or by 2021 — fossil-fuel dust injected by man into the atmosphere “could screen out so much sunlight that the average temperature could drop by six degrees,” resulting in a buildup of “new glaciers that could eventually cover huge areas.”

    If sustained over “several years, five to 10,” or so Mr. Rasool estimated, “such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”

    http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

    There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

    The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

    To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”

    A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.
     
  18. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,957
    Likes Received:
    10,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I found this gem.

    http://www.wecnmagazine.com/2007issues/may/may07.html#1

    Reid A. Bryson holds the 30th PhD in Meteorology granted in the history of American education. Emeritus Professor and founding chairman of the University of Wisconsin Department of Meteorology—now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences—in the 1970s he became the first director of what’s now the UW’s Gaylord Nelson Institute of Environmental Studies. He’s a member of the United Nations Global 500 Roll of Honor—created, the U.N. says, to recognize “outstanding achievements in the protection and improvement of the environment.” He has authored five books and more than 230 other publications and was identified by the British Institute of Geographers as the most frequently cited climatologist in the world.

    ...

    Bryson is a believer in climate change, in that he’s as quick as anyone to acknowledge that Earth’s climate has done nothing but change throughout the planet’s existence. In fact, he took that knowledge a big step further, earlier than probably anyone else. Almost 40 years ago, Bryson stood before the American Association for the Advancement of Science and presented a paper saying human activity could alter climate.

    “I was laughed off the platform for saying that,” he told Wisconsin Energy Cooperative News.

    In the 1960s, Bryson’s idea was widely considered a radical proposition. But nowadays things have turned almost in the opposite direction: Hardly a day passes without some authority figure claiming that whatever the climate happens to be doing, human activity must be part of the explanation. And once again, Bryson is challenging the conventional wisdom.

    “Climate’s always been changing and it’s been changing rapidly at various times, and so something was making it change in the past,” he told us in an interview this past winter. “Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?”

    “All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd,” Bryson continues. “Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.”

    Little Ice Age? That’s what chased the Vikings out of Greenland after they’d farmed there for a few hundred years during the Mediaeval Warm Period, an earlier run of a few centuries when the planet was very likely warmer than it is now, without any help from industrial activity in making it that way. What’s called “proxy evidence”—assorted clues extrapolated from marine sediment cores, pollen specimens, and tree-ring data—helps reconstruct the climate in those times before instrumental temperature records existed.

    We ask about that evidence, but Bryson says it’s second-tier stuff. “Don’t talk about proxies,” he says. “We have written evidence, eyeball evidence. When Eric the Red went to Greenland, how did he get there? It’s all written down.”

    Bryson describes the navigational instructions provided for Norse mariners making their way from Europe to their settlements in Greenland. The place was named for a reason: The Norse farmed there from the 10th century to the 13th, a somewhat longer period than the United States has existed. But around 1200 the mariners’ instructions changed in a big way. Ice became a major navigational reference. Today, old Viking farmsteads are covered by glaciers.

    Bryson mentions the retreat of Alpine glaciers, common grist for current headlines. “What do they find when the ice sheets retreat, in the Alps?”

    We recall the two-year-old report saying a mature forest and agricultural water-management structures had been discovered emerging from the ice, seeing sunlight for the first time in thousands of years. Bryson interrupts excitedly.

    “A silver mine! The guys had stacked up their tools because they were going to be back the next spring to mine more silver, only the snow never went,” he says. “There used to be less ice than now. It’s just getting back to normal.”
     
  19. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Man, they just keep changing their stance, these scientists! It's almost like they see empirical evidence and adjust their models accordingly!
     
    Further likes this.
  20. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,059
    Likes Received:
    8,157
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    It doubled, 40,000 to 80,000, many of them Hispanic.

    Tell me what I missed. I have seen a very noticeable change over the last 30 years.
     

Share This Page