Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

$100,000 Offered to Prove Global Warming: Can You Save Al Gore?
News Busters ^ | August 7, 2007 | Noel Sheppard

Posted on 08/07/2007 7:59:18 AM PDT by IrishMike

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 last
To: IrishMike
No problem. After reading this thread, I discovered this blog posting highlighting the same thing I did:

Steve Milloy's New Latest Scam

41 posted on 08/09/2007 1:38:07 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: P-40
The IPCC claims a 90% probability that the Earth is warming but I forget their probability that a 'significant' portion of that is due to mankind.

For what the IPCC really says, go here:

Summary for Policymakers

"The understanding of anthropogenic warming and cooling influences on climate has improved since the Third Assessment Report (TAR), leading to very high confidence7 that the globally averaged net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming, with a radiative forcing of +1.6 [+0.6 to +2.4] W m-2. (see Figure SPM-2). {2.3. 6.5, 2.9}"

"Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations12. This is an advance since the TAR’s conclusion that “most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations”. Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including ocean warming, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns (see Figure SPM-4 and Table SPM-2). {9.4, 9.5}"

Footnote 6 reads: "In this Summary for Policymakers, the following terms have been used to indicate the assessed likelihood, using expert judgement, of an outcome or a result: Virtually certain > 99% probability of occurrence, Extremely likely > 95%, Very likely > 90%, Likely > 66%, More likely than not > 50%, Unlikely < 33%, Very unlikely < 10%, Extremely unlikely < 5%. (See Box TS.1.1 for more details)."

Footnote 7 reads: "In this Summary for Policymakers the following levels of confidence have been used to express expert judgments on the correctness of the underlying science: very high confidence at least a 9 out of 10 chance of being correct; high confidence about an 8 out of 10 chance of being correct. (See Box TS.1.1)"

Footnote 12 reads: "Consideration of remaining uncertainty is based on current methodologies."

Note that they do not quantify the usage of "most" in the second quote, at least in the Summary for Policymakers. The full report might.

42 posted on 08/09/2007 1:49:37 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

I would skip the summaries. The IPCC reports are generally pretty good...but the summaries are where the politics come in. They must spend a lot of hours on those things.


43 posted on 08/09/2007 1:54:40 PM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
IPCC Working Group I, Chapter 9

Section 9.4.1.2 may be of interest to you.

44 posted on 08/09/2007 1:56:23 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: IrishMike
Yes I can prove it gets hot every year. It’s called Summer time. Just wire me my moolah.
45 posted on 08/09/2007 1:57:15 PM PDT by 4yearlurker (All comments now being monitored by BOR. He's looking out for you!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-40

You expressed uncertainty and I attempted to remedy that. The Summary provides information regarding about the uncertainty you expressed.


46 posted on 08/09/2007 1:58:50 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

Right. I was not exactly referring to what you said, just to the policy summary in general. Sorry if that came across wrong.


47 posted on 08/09/2007 2:05:10 PM PDT by P-40 (Al Qaeda was working in Iraq. They were just undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: 4yearlurker

Wrong. You didn’t read the terms and conditions. See the italics in #4.


48 posted on 08/09/2007 2:15:21 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson