We’re 95% confident that we got it half right.
Last night Professor Judith Curry, head of climate science at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, said the leaked summary showed that ‘the science is clearly not settled, and is in a state of flux’.
And over on RealClimate, Gavin lays out the fertilizer. Of course the models were wrong, we expected that.
More juiciness at Watts Up With That and from Judith Curry.
I vote we stop talking about it. They’ve promised us global warming all these years and nothing, nadda, zippo. It’s pretty disheartening when they get your expectations up that Canadian winters are going to be like Arizona’s only to find out later they was just foolin’.
Hey, it’s not the warm mongers’ fault.
It’s the computers that got it wrong.
What a bunch of maroons!
Half right, half wrong, half assed…We’re all gonna Die!!!
Gavin, the idiot pseudo-scientist, is talking about a topic I know a great deal about.
Trust me on this one: they are on the run.
Have to hang this on the Enviro Greenie Industry.
$$$$$$trillions have no been spent on because the Greenie Idiots used the Great CO2 Hysteria has been used to change public policies.
The result has been incredible wealth has been wasted chasing greenie genies instead of being put to uses that benefit society.
Which means Lizzie May . . . You are a complete moron.
‘the science is clearly not settled, and is in a state of flux’.
In fact you could say, it’s totally ‘fluxed’.
The problem is,they keep saying the “science”. It ain’t science,it is a religion.And an anti-human,money grubbing one at that.
Is the “tar” from the “tar sands” useable in tarring and feathering these sonsabitches before we run ’em outta town?
Now,I’m not one to advocate violence against anybody,believing we can all just smoke a joint together and get along with a big group
hug, but sometimes…..
Regarding “Gavin’s fertilizer”: I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt about scientific problems of modelling. I do notice that he misses other non-scientific but fairly well understood reasons like confirmation bias, motivated reasoning, misplaced loyalty and noble cause corruption. Curry and others have some excellent posts on these subjects.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/08/20/scientists-and-motivated-reasoning/
Scientists are people who are subject the same flaws as everyone else. Even a casual understanding of the history of science makes this very clear. Every new discovery was overturning the existing orthodoxy and the challenging the reputation and careers of establishment scientists. Adding in politics and religious righteousness just makes things worse.
It was snark on my part. I found it humourous that now the models have built in errors when previously they were the word of God.
Out of curiosity: is there any explanation about how the 95% confidence level was calculated? Is it scientific or political? I’d be surprised if journalists look for the source before they write their stories so hopefully skeptics will track it down.
But still..
We cant have 2 trillion dollars spent on nothing, right under the noses of our useless leaders (left and right).. So they have to leak so they can get their story straight.. Float a few excuses to see which ones the left and right can stomach.. A few opinion pieces with the its all pollution anyway and the RnD will pay off in spades (lie) in the future..
A very sad STATE of affairs..
We cant remove one half of our political system and still maintain the illusion of control. Its like parents fighting in front of the children.. You just cant put childish temper tantrums back into the bag because you have calmed down.. Appealing to the children only makes it worse, you can see them tune out with distrust and dysfunction in their eyes..
The public just wants the government to lead, just as children want their parents to parent.. Turning to them for therapy and forgiveness with the expectation of them picking sides in a fight they want no part of, only undermines yourself further..
Its the death spiral of people and politics that have forgotten their true role..
Mom and dad will make up because they cant afford to divorce.. The shell shocked kids will recover as long as their is no yelling in the house.. But dont be surprised when your kids step in the next time you raise your voice..
They know your good enough to bring home a paycheck but not good enough to run your own personal affairs.. You go from manager to something that is managed and you did it to yourself because you wanted the kids (public) on your side..
Biggest political personal mistake you could ever make.. Forgetting your role even if it is a illusion.
Snark, one of my favorite methods of communication.
I wonder if The Team ever considered that if the models are that prone to error and need improvement then the science is too immature to make policy recommendations. Lower sensitivity means more time to understand the process *before* wasting billions or trillions of dollars on not-ready-for-primetime green energy and forcing people into energy poverty.
Here’s an idea for a T-Shirt:
My government wasted billions of $$$ on climate change and all I got was a stupid smart meter.
Out of curiosity: is there any explanation about how the 95% confidence level was calculated?
——
Sure a bunch of 20 something kids crunched a few thousand papers together in such a way (cheating) that would please their political masters.. It a bit of a long boring story with the only interesting part being their refusal to admit its a heap of steaming dung..
Well, this is what Lindzen was saying since 2006 or so. What a bunch of arrogant scum bags. They should all be fired for “attitude” reasons, to protect ourselves from their future, fraudulent studies.
Got my popcorn and a comfy seat to enjoy the show 🙂
I think your being to kind with billions.. Add up what was spent on all related decarbonating efforts and its spin offs and add to that the crippling damage this agenda has done to our western economy, you know what could have been..
The number is in the two trillion dollar range.. Its a very big number but we are talking about 20 years of going the wrong way because of a green detour sign.. Handing over your fuel bill is not an accurate account of your adventure.. There is food, accommodation and entertainment as well.. Then your lucky to even find your way back to square one, never mind where you should have been..
In short your lost and broke, lying and hiding the true cost of using your computer models as GPS..
Two trillion dollars up in smoke on a leftist road trip..
“The 2012 draft makes no mention of the pause and, far from admitting that the Middle Ages were unusually warm, it states that today’s temperatures are the highest for at least 1,300 years, as it did in 2007… as things stand, the atmosphere is expected to have twice as much CO2 as in pre-industrial times by about 2050. In 2007, the IPCC said the ‘likeliest’ figure was 3C, with up to 4.5C still ‘likely’… Now it does not give a ‘likeliest’ value and admits it is ‘likely’ it may be as little as 1.5C – so giving the world many more decades to work out how to reduce carbon emissions before temperatures rise to dangerous levels… As a result of the warming pause, several recent peer-reviewed scientific studies have suggested that the true figure for the sensitivity is much lower than anyone – the IPCC included – previously thought: probably less than 2C.”
IOW they don’t have a friggin clue what future temperatures will be. The warmists will not be deterred, there is too much at stake for them.
Dedicated to the money spent and the average persons economic future..
Up in Smoke, is where my money goes!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUWD-FflZPI
You’re right.
I still like the symbolism of the smart meter. It combines the elements of exchanging an old system that worked fine for one they claimed would save you money, charging you to install it, electricity prices rise negating any TOD ‘savings’ and it can be programmed to increase governments control freak tendencies. In reality it does not even have noticeable benefits for the environments.
Lots of money moving from your pocket into the government’s and friend’s for zero ROI for the consumer.
Nice…I’ll take two..
Environmentalism is the new last refuge of a scoundrel.. Much the same as patriotism except on a global scale..
Any name with the word “Smart” in it is to appeal to the inflated egos of the idiots who follow their political agenda.. Unabashed flattery in place of better solutions or simply to hide their own incompetence (power generation)..
Its a sick joke renaming the poo end of the stick the smart end of the stick.. Look at me, I have poo on my hand I must be smart, is hardly a ringing endorsement of your intelligence.. But it is a clear sign you’re selling something.. In this case its politics..
We’re 95% confident that we got it half right.
I’m 100% confident that a lot of charlatans have enriched themselves at expense of humanity without providing an iota of benefit. Shame on everyone who bought into the fraud.
Scientists accept their computers ‘may have exaggerated’
–
What a bunch of bullshit.
Computers only process the garbage they put in or garbage they put out.
We need to take a ‘hockey stick’ and beat the piss out of all these clowns.
YOU FRAUDS,
SHAME ON YOU,
AL whore GORE,
AND ALL THE MONEY YOU STOLE FROM POOR COUNTRIES AND POOR PEOPLE.
Time for some PAYBACK..
Nothing will change.
The liberal homosexist warmist elite will continue to rip us off.
Windfarms and solar panels will spread like dandelions everywhere.
The only questions is how long before Canada, EU, OZ, and USA become a cross between Detroit and Zimbabwe?
Think Detroit policed by privatized Black and Tans.
Not as long as you think.
I can’t help thinking back to the whole nuclear winter charade, which, as everyone now knows, was complete fiction, invented by the KGB and put about on their behalf by dupes and collaborators in the Western scientific community, to scare Western liberals into bed and into communist-front anti-nuke groups.
The problem here was that it’s possible to test the models of global warming in a way nobody (our enemies hoped!) would ever dare test a model of nuclear winter.
Maybe one day before the Lord returns, we’ll find out who was the real author of this farce.
The two prime suspects, to my mind:
1. Global banks, who were looking forward to fat profits from speculation in emissions permits.
2. The Chinese communists, who were not seriously expected by Kyoto to limit their pollution, and helped themselves to a larger chunk of the West’s industrial base than they would have been able to had Western firms not been hobbled by carbon taxes, green regulation and their like.
Jay
it is not the job of the gov’t to LEAD, their job is to govern according to the wishes of the electorate, they trying to lead us and there is were much of the problem lies.
and even if the computers were dead accurate, the models would still be wrong, because their data collection methods suck, and then there is the fact that they alter the data to suit their thinking, so by the time the poor computer gits it, it’s f**ked!!
Meanwhile the present Federal Government still clings to Global Warming/Climate Change because of their fear of enviroMENTALists. The day Harper, and Minister of the Environment, says the this new religion is false is the day I will believe that that will have nothing to do with it …. never will happen, sad.
The same goes for the Ontario Government. The only one that said they had great doubts of Global Warming/Climate Change was the Wildrose Party in Alberta.
“…it is not the job of the gov’t to LEAD, their job is to govern according to the wishes of the electorate…”
Really? Is that written down somewhere? And if it is, does anybody actually believe it?
Good thing Churchill didn’t subscribe to that theory.
No, those are both johnny-come-latelies simply cashing in on other people’s stupidity. It’s not the large banks that are the financial villains, it’s the large global !surance companies mostly to blame for overhyping the threat. They want new disasters to sell policies against.
The real central villains of the piece are:
1. the renewable energy movement starting with Amory Lovins who saw renewable energy as a way to achieve energy nirvana without having to have engineers involved. Call it the hippy “small is beautiful” movement starting in the ’60s.
2. the peacenik “ban the bomb” movement which foresaw accurately that fossil fuels dependency would create an endless series of wars for the United States, but because of 1. hated the obvious answer which was nuclear power.
3. the UN bureaucracy which saw global warming as a means of creating greater authority for the UN at the expense of national sovereignty. You can lay the blame for this in part on a number of fearless “great” Canadians here: Maurice Strong, Chair of the Rio 92 conference, and the two bureaucrats who were Canada’s delegation to the Brundland Commission in 1987-88.
4. the European Union which saw global warming as a way of crippling the growing competitiveness of North America with Asia.
I’m just waiting for Prince Charles to say we’ve finally crossed the red line.
Canadians commenting on articles such as “Harper goes to BC to push the pipeline”, still yammer on and on about climate change, carbon pollution and the need for a carbon tax. Are they nuts or just poorly educated?
To sum up, the “computer climate models” are still subject to the rule ‘Garbage in, garbage out’.
Judith Curry from your link —
What they say: ‘The rate of warming since 1951 [has been] 0.12C per decade.’
What this means: In their last hugely influential report in 2007, the IPCC claimed the world was warming at 0.2C per decade. Here they admit there has been a massive cut in the speed of global warming – although it’s buried in a section on the recent warming ‘pause’.
Apparently this found its way half-way around the the world before Truth could put on its pants.
Did the IPCC get it wrong? – experts respond
The Australian misrepresents the IPCC, claiming “The 2007 assessment report said the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2°C every decade, but according to Britain’s The Daily Mail the draft update report says the true figure since 1951 has been 0.12°C”. In actuality, the trend reported in the IPCC report was 0.13°C per decade (http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-direct-observations.html).
The day your site introduced me to Anthony Watts is the day my blood pressure dropped 15 points. I will be forever grateful.
Patriots are scoundrels? Explain that.
dizzy,
From your link:
” it is possible for a report on this or any similar topic to reach firm conclusions about important questions even when some aspects of the science are well known to be “unsettled” or in a “state of flux.” Just as it is possible to know that a cancer patient is likely to die without treatment, even if the date or particular symptoms cannot be predicted accurately.”
This example is ridiculous. We have seen millions of cases of cancer, so yes, we know the likely outcomes of various cancer scenarios. We have no such information on warming, we have large uncertainties, which Prof Sherwood admits. He then offers his OPINION that we know enough now despite that uncertainty to start dictating how people should live.
If this is the best you guys have got, no wonder you lot are on the run intellectually.
The first experiment showing that CO2 in a gas mixture causes heat retention was made some 150 years ago. And such a phenomenon had been conjectured to be controlling earth’s climate in 1832. Since then, there have been countless experimental verifications, paleo reconstructions & 60 or seventy years of measurements of increasing CO2 in our atmosphere & consequent disequalibrium of heat in & heat out as heat is retained.
If the best “you guys” have got is to dispute the choice of analogies while ignoring the howlers made by the rejectionists, you really ought to read some real climate science, instead of learning biology from creationists. Two Centuries of Climate Science.
Like that analogy?
The nonsense at RealClimate was more like a Real Hoot — effectively saying, “Even when we’re wrong we’re right”. The great thing about being a lefty: always wrong, never in doubt.
Yeah well, perhaps you are unfamiliar with Samuel Johnson, an eccentric 18th century Englishman. He was a pamphleteer, who held forth against colonizing America (considered it trespassing/theft), hated Scotland and loathed scots…..not exactly a Shelley or Keats…..
I would say that quoting Samuel Johnson is probably the last resort of scoundrels……….