November 2012 Open Thread

It’s a new month!

Comments

  1. #1 ianam
    December 1, 2012

    “CO2 Hits New High; World Could Warm 7°F by 2060″

    The obvious fail here is the word “could”, there’s nothing empirical about that.

    It’s tragicomedic that people like GSW don’t get that this sort of thing is like a scroll of permanent credibility removal … only sophist anuses make such an argument, which is chock full of fallacy and intellectual dishonesty. And laziness … attacking the title of a link is bottom-of-the-barrel intellectual sloth. It wouldn’t take all that much more work to say something equally stupid and uncomprehending of the nature of empirical science about the statement from the actual report:

    This report provides a snapshot of recent scientific literature and new analyses of likely impacts and risks that would be associated
    with a 4° Celsius warming within this century. It is a rigorous attempt to outline a range of risks, focusing on developing
    countries and especially the poor. A 4°C world would be one of unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods
    in many regions, with serious impacts on ecosystems and associated services. But with action, a 4°C world can be avoided
    and we can likely hold warming below 2°C.
    Without further commitments and action to reduce greenhouse
    gas emissions, the world is likely to warm by more than 3°C
    above the preindustrial climate. Even with the current mitigation
    commitments and pledges fully implemented, there is roughly a
    20 percent likelihood of exceeding 4°C by 2100. If they are not
    met, a warming of 4°C could occur as early as the 2060s.

  2. #2 Lotharsson
    December 1, 2012

    Sometimes someone finally encounters the evidence that will cause them to leave the bubble.

  3. #3 Lionel A
    December 1, 2012

    Of course the troll collective around here won’t want to understand this Science Stunner: Greenland Ice Melt Up Nearly Five-Fold Since Mid-1990s, Antartica’s Ice Loss Up 50% In Past Decade, but keep trying you guys for every post you make highlights the increasing idiocy of your logic and allows us to reply and thus helping to educate any lurkers.

    The only beef I have with that headline is with the word ‘Stunner‘ for considering what I have been learning about the cryosphere breakdown is no surprise to me and I doubt it is to many here. One source is of course that James Balog Extreme Ice Survey, which for the intellectually challenged around here (GSW & Co.) is the source of the film that shocked one women out of her belief in that tin god O’Reilly – as reported by Lotharsson above.

    O’Reilly is a clown, one of a troupe on Fox and beyond. Google on his name and look at some of the images that pop up. There is one, probably ph’shopped (dunno), which makes him look, what he is, ridiculous in a lime green gonad halter, do not have any food or drink in your mouth if looking and have a bucket handy.

  4. #4 Lionel A
    December 1, 2012

    Californians are being reminded of Atmospheric Rivers like those seen in the past and which the UK has experienced recently.

  5. #5 Lionel A
    December 1, 2012

    In the best traditions of David Duff here you trolls is one for you to slaver over OPEN CLIMATE LETTER TO UN SECRETARY-GENERAL: Current scientific knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate, say 125-plus scientists., don’t say I don’t think of you for you will fit right in with the commentators there.

    But heck. Who needs the rest of the text with a headline like that!

    Visit SkS for the pre-debunk.

  6. #6 chek
    December 1, 2012

    Heh – the usual suspects must think they’re more impresdsive as a gang. A quick perusal of the troll collective’s thread here might have disabused them of that notion.

  7. #7 chek
    December 1, 2012

    Duh – that should be ‘impressive’. I may’ve been distracted while chortling over the Watt-a-moron level of ‘scientic points’ that they expect to be taken seriously.

  8. #8 Bernard J.
    December 1, 2012

    Lionel:

    Of course the troll collective around here won’t want to understand this…

    They don’t want to, but they do.

    It’s why they won’t put their money where their mouths are.

  9. #9 joni
    December 2, 2012

    I’m amazed that Duff has not been around telling everyone how cold it is in Bath (I’m in Bristol) – because I’m sure he’s say how the cold means that AGW is bumpkin. sigh.

  10. #10 Jeff Harvey
    December 2, 2012

    The 125 ‘scientists’ are mostly culled from the usual band of deniers, amongst them many retired researchers. And amongst these so-called scientists are many who aren’t scientists at all. Weathermen? And the scientific pedigree (publications, citations) of many of these people is pretty low, as well.

    Essentially, the fact that they have to scrape the bottom of the barrel for names reveals how thin on the ground the ranks of real scientists they have on their side is.

  11. #11 lord_sidcup
    December 2, 2012

    They are desparate. 125+ including serial liar Monckton, on which topic I note the Richard Courtney appears in that list and is described as a PhD rather than a DipPhil:

    http://www.desmogblog.com/richard-s-courtney

  12. #12 Lionel A
    December 2, 2012

    joni pondered:

    I’m amazed that Duff has not been around telling everyone how cold it is in Bath (I’m in Bristol) – because I’m sure he’s say how the cold means that AGW is bumpkin. sigh.

    There may be a clue here . Maybe duff is no longer so bullish, or boorish for that matter. On that latter we will have to wait and see.

  13. #13 joni
    December 2, 2012

    Lionel A

    Luckily where we are it is OK, but around the SW it is pretty bad at the moment and more heavy rain (and floods) are forecast for tonight.

  14. #14 Lionel A
    December 2, 2012

    Watch this and weep atmospheric metric tons of GHGs.

    Well perhaps weeping won’t help that much for Sea Level Rise Accelerating Faster than Initial Projections.

  15. #15 Lionel A
    December 2, 2012

    Clang!

    Watch this and weep atmospheric metric tons of GHGs.

    Well perhaps weeping won’t help that much for Sea Level Rise Accelerating Faster than Initial Projections.

  16. #16 Jeff Harvey
    December 2, 2012

    Here’s where Jonas, GSW, Olaus and the other deniers break into a tantrum: it ain’t so! It ain’t so! There’s no hugely well funded denial industry! How do we know that? Because! Because! And mostly because we refuse to read anything about it! Therefore it doesn’t exist!

    But of course, if one bothers to look beyond the end of their nose, particularly at the public relations industry (massive) and at the sheer number of right wing think tanks (huge and still growing), both of which receive huge amounts of money from industry, then the extent of the denial industry takes on a whole new dimension:

    http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.com/index.php?ref=MjBfMTFfMzBfMTJfMV85Ml8xNTE1MTA%3D

Current ye@r *