Skip to comments.Dialing Back the Alarm on Climate Change
Posted on 09/14/2013 2:36:48 AM PDT by Rocky
Later this month, a long-awaited event that last happened in 2007 will recur. Like a returning comet, it will be taken to portend ominous happenings. I refer to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) "fifth assessment report," part of which will be published on Sept. 27.
There have already been leaks from this 31-page document, which summarizes 1,914 pages of scientific discussion, but thanks to a senior climate scientist, I have had a glimpse of the key prediction at the heart of the document. The big news is that, for the first time since these reports started coming out in 1990, the new one dials back the alarm. It states that the temperature rise we can expect as a result of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide is lower than the IPPC thought in 2007.
---------------------- (snip) ----------------
A more immediately relevant measure of likely warming has also come down: "transient climate response" (TCR)the actual temperature change expected from a doubling of carbon dioxide about 70 years from now, without the delayed effects that come in the next century. The new report will say that this change is "likely" to be 1 to 2.5 degrees Celsius and "extremely unlikely" to be greater than 3 degrees. This again is lower than when last estimated in 2007 ("very likely" warming of 1 to 3 degrees Celsius, based on models, or 1 to 3.5 degrees, based on observational studies).
Most experts believe that warming of less than 2 degrees Celsius from preindustrial levels will result in no net economic and ecological damage. Therefore, the new report is effectively saying (based on the middle of the range of the IPCC's emissions scenarios) that there is a better than 50-50 chance that by 2083, the benefits of climate change will still outweigh the harm.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Unfortunately, it is full speed ahead for the Obama government and EPA, specifically. The rush is own to fully subjugate the population with the global warming lie before Obama's term ends.
The article also says that a mild increase in global temperature would actually have some beneficial effects.
For a look at the economics of trying to mitigate CO2 increases, see the video interviews at:
Here in Alabama we have 52 degrees of global climate change at 5:45 am this September 14th morning.
Send all of these scientists to the Arctic today... they will all freeze to death and their boats will crush under the weight of massive Ice Cap Reformation. If they are all dead... we no longer have to listen to their con.
I think he had more than a 'glimpse' of the document.
2007 (Heidi is no longer with the Weather Channel)
The Weather Channels (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program “The Climate Code,” is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their “Seal of Approval” for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe.
“If a meteorologist can’t speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn’t give them a Seal of Approval.
Nowhere have I seen any concern or discussion on the essential questions: what is the optimum level of CO2, what is the optimum temperature? Are we above or below the optimum of either?
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls our climates.
3. The earth is a rock.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
By TAXING THE LIVING HELL out of all the less-than-specks who live under their rule! DUH!
I don’t know any details beyond the “taxing” part. But that is where they are trying to start!
Yes, the “optimum” CO2 level is hard to get a handle on. And for the CAGW crowd, it might lead to An Inconvenient Truth. That is, that we would be better off at a higher concentration than we have today.
So, my guess is: No research money to figure that one out.
Yep. If you don't have a good argument, then try to silence the opposition. The same strategy was revealed in the Climategate e-mails.
As fast as that document has been changing, any snapshot is just a glimpse in time.
Or these guys:
Or maybe these guys:
Only six years ago, the BBC reported that the Arctic would be ice-free in summer by 2013, citing a scientist in the US who claimed this was a conservative forecast. Perhaps it was their confidence that led more than 20 yachts to try to sail the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific this summer. As of last week, all these vessels were stuck in the ice, some at the eastern end of the passage in Prince Regent Inlet, others further west at Cape Bathurst.
Shipping experts said the only way these vessels were likely to be freed was by the icebreakers of the Canadian coastguard. According to the official Canadian government website, the Northwest Passage has remained ice-bound and impassable all summer.
That is it exactly Rocky. Excellent!