Posted on 01/01/2014 4:37:14 PM PST by Libloather
**SNIP**
The scientist leading the research said that unless emissions of greenhouse gases were cut, the planet would heat up by a minimum of 4C by 2100, twice the level the world's governments deem dangerous.
The research indicates that fewer clouds form as the planet warms, meaning less sunlight is reflected back into space, driving temperatures up further still. The way clouds affect global warming has been the biggest mystery surrounding future climate change.
Professor Steven Sherwood, at the University of New South Wales, in Australia, who led the new work, said: "This study breaks new ground twice: first by identifying what is controlling the cloud changes and second by strongly discounting the lowest estimates of future global warming in favour of the higher and more damaging estimates."
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
Is there any scientific evidence showing that just one 'climate model' has worked out the way they said it would?
The research indicates that fewer clouds form as the planet warms
That would mean more hurricanes would be a good thing - no?
He added: "Rises in global average temperatures of [at least 4C by 2100] will have profound impacts on the world and the economies of many countries if we don't urgently start to curb our emissions."
Yet the cult refuses to stop purchasing and burning fossil fuel. Very confusing.
When will the planet reverse the constant, uninterrupted cooling that began in 1934?
Whatever, These people are just in for the money they can put in their pocket. They will never let go of this lie and fraud.
The more that globull warming is proven to be a hoax, the more shrill their predictions have become in order to scare the gullible and prevent them from wandering off the farm.
Why should I care about what happens in 2100 any more than I care about what goes on at some distant planet?
I wish these science dimwits would stop blowing smoke up our patoots.
I wish the Guardian would post climate predictions from 20 years ago to validate the track record.
I think I know why they don’t.
Same thing for the market prognosticators. Tell us what the were saying end of 2012. Few (if any) predicted a 28% S&P increase, yet they expect us to listen to their 2014 predictions.
I personally feel quite confident in making predictions of the future beyond the date of my latest possible demise. There will be no personal accountability at the time the data become available, and its fun (and potentially profitable) now.
“Rises in global average temperatures of [at least 4C by 2100]
Maybe that will free the global warming researchers stuck in the ice on that ship in Antarctica.
Al Gore predicted in 2008 that there would be no ice in the Arctic. I would encourage you to read the piece below beyond the excerpt.
Excerpt -
Self-styled “global-warming” guru Al Gore (shown) and a gaggle of supposed “climate scientists” have egg all over their faces — big time. In 2007, 2008 and 2009, Gore publicly and very hysterically warned that the North Pole would be “ice-free” by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made global warming.” Citing “climate” experts, the government-funded BBC hyped the mass hysteria, running a now-embarrassing article under the headline: “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’.” Other establishment media outlets did the same.
Well, 2013 is almost over, and contrary to the alarmist “predictions” by Gore and what critics refer to as his “doomsday cult,” the latest satellite data show that Arctic ice cover has actually expanded 50 percent over 2012 levels. In fact, during October, sea-ice levels grew at the fastest pace since records began in 1979. Experts predict the expansion to continue in the years to come, leaving global-warming alarmists scrambling fiendishly for explanations to save face — and to revive the rapidly melting climate hysteria.
Excellent comments!
The best thing anybody who believes this can do is to delete themselves to save the planet.
One of out local weathermen often sites a couple of computer models for the 7 day forecast. There’s plenty of variation and that’s only for 7 days. Imagine the amount of error for an 86 year forecast.
Our local Gannett generipaper now has a full section of USA Today in place of the stuff that (laid off) local reporters used to write.
I truly believe they have a global warming story 4 days a week. Today’s was “yes there were more record lows in the US in 2013 than record highs, but that’s just a small amount of the earth”
Clouds are modulated by cosmic rays that are not in any climate model. High clouds will generally warm the planet, low cloud tops cool the planet since they are warmer cloud tops and emit more longwave radiation. Climate models must parameterize high and low clouds based on other coarsely simulated values (e.g. buoyancy in a very large grid cell). There is no likelihood of them getting it right in the current, never mind projected environment.
To pretend that they suddenly have a handle on clouds is basically fraud, but that's no surprise for this guy. He is one of the primary alarmists writing the IPCC chapter that specifically ignores cosmic ray and other solar-related influences on climate. More here: http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/alec-rawls-responds-to-steven-sherwood-the-bad-professor-is-inverting-the-scientific-method/
This whole hoax is about scaring the people into accepting and even demanding socialism and world government.
I don’t pretend to be a climate scientist or scientist of any kind. But when the “cure” is always the same- more and more government control and taxation- its sort of a tell.
If the manmade global warming theory were credible, you’d see conservative and moderate ideas on what needs to be done- but you don’t see that at all.
The politics holds sway over the “science” here.
We’ll all be wearing environmentally controlled suits by then so who cares
Not going to happen. Europe tried, but I don't think they got anywhere. China and India aren't going to put their economies into reverse. obama is trying on ours, but only has three years to put us back into the 1920s.
It takes very little effort indeed to find the similar "research" we have all heard that explains that global warming creates more clouds, citing Superstorm Sandy as an instance.
http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/The-risk-of-extreme-weather-on-upswing-3998651.php
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.