WUWT; (sorry, link fixed)
The definition of ‘climate’ adopted by the World Meteorological Organisation is the average of a particular weather parameter over 30 years. It was introduced at the 1934 Wiesbaden conference of the International Meteorological Organisation (WMO’s precursor) because data sets were only held to be reliable after 1900, so 1901 – 1930 was used as an initial basis for assessing climate. It has a certain arbitrariness, it could have been 25 years.
For its recent 1.5°C report the IPCC has changed the definition of climate to what has been loosely called “the climate we are in.” It still uses 30 years for its estimate of global warming and hence climate – but now it is the 30 years centred on the present.
There are some obvious problems with this hidden change of goalposts. We have observational temperature data for the past 15 years but, of course, none for the next 15 years. However, never let it be said that the absence of data is a problem for inventive climate scientists.
On the same subject
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/7509978/UN-admits-flaw-in-report-on-meat-and-climate-change.html
It seems when they calculated emissions from livestock they included the full supply chain from seeds for feed, to hoof, to grocery store. For transport they only calculated emissions from the tailpipe.
Let them eat steak.
Same scientist as above but more recent. https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2018/10/29/a_huge_misconception_about_meat-eating_cows_are_not_killing_the_climate_110781.html
It becomes more clear each day that the Political Left,ie the Liberals/NDP/Green, have decided that World-Wide-Communism/One World Government is their goal.
And the Kyoto Protocol/Anthropogenic Warming/Man-Made Warming/Global Warming/Climate Change/Pollution is their final piece.
Most of the Western World has already turned their whole life over to the Government……from elder/healthcare and education to pensions, and safety from offensive comments. And that’s just the beginning.
So it’s easy to see why the next step, a tax on carbon accomplishes The Goal.
Is not a Tax on Movement, a Tax On Everything, a back door way to control the means of production, which is pretty much the only Non-Collectivist shibboleth we still observe?
Where oh where is our Joseph McCarthy?
The taxation system was the first weapon used by their Russian Bolshevik ideological forebears in order to get rid of the churches and peasant farmers. They kept raising the taxes until they bankrupted the churches and the independent farmers. Those few churches that managed to find the funds to pay the taxes were just ultimately closed by the Cheka/NKVD police and the clergy and leadership arrested and shot or sentenced to Gulag terms. The stubborn resisting farmers were arrested, their farms were confiscated, and they were sentenced to Gulag terms.
The main weapon was using the tax system, which was combined with tightening regulation.
The manipulation won’t stop until the funding is cut and that won’t happen as long as the faithful continue voting for the most effective hysteria pimping politicians de jour. The best that we could hope for is if all the contributors to the IPCC had to wear religious garb such as that worn by Anglican archbishops.
Stop calling it “science”. It is statistical manipulation. AGW has so little to do with “science” that it must be recategorized as political advocacy.
It’s political not climate science or anything approaching empirical. It’s been junk from day one and nothing’s changed.
Garbage in; garbage out. That’s the only scientific principle at work here.
What is the scientific certainty of their constant “hottest year on record?” Last time I checked, about 36%, iow random.
Now they say the ice extent is lower that it’s ever been – in 30 years and ever since satellite measurements started.
Based on a 30 year climate record? Those same models repudiate CAGW theory, but that’s another story. to suppress.
It’s an excuse to control through taxation. That’s a known thing. Taxaction is a political loser.
If this nonsense was real, that the earth was actually in danger, why would be export millions of tons of coal every year to where all the emissions growth (the culprit right, given human activity is about 3.5% of all CO2 emissions) actually lies –
In China and India. Canada at a pittance of 2% of 3.5% is the poster child for evil petro-prosperity. Why? Soft target.
Mr Trudeau, how much will your carbon tax reduce global warming? Someone should ask him, maybe get an answer instead of speechifying and nonsense about doing our part by undermining our birthright as a nation – our natural resources.
I would like to hear his answer though.
Trudeau already answered that question (consequences) in a French interview and the answer was: “No consequences”. So it is a scam, a total and utter fraud.
Then perhaps he can explain how this justifies closing our nation for business where only cronies need apply.
I have a 15yo son. He was about 18 inches tall at birth and is about 5ft 10 inches now. So he grows about 3.5 inches per year. Using the same reasoning as the IPCC, he will be over 10 feet tall when he is a 30yo. It’s science, don’t be a science denier. ./s
Mixing 15 years of purely speculative temperature data about the future under the assumption that it will be identical to the rise of the previous 15 years of real data is just bizarre. No limiting factors, no natural cycles, no other variables at all. If there’s a purpose other than to hype the Climate Doom narrative, to distort, to confuse… then what is it?
No … your analogy PROVES Global Warming models!! You see, your son took in lots of calories as a teenager … and it made him grow tall and strong … but IF … he keeps eating the same amount of calories after age 22 … he will just get fatter and fatter and unhealthy … until he DIES a premature death.
Same with the Co2 being fed into our atmosphere. Our planet naturally needs a certain amount of Co2 for plant life to thrive … but if fossil fuel industrialization and fat greedy capitalism keeps force feeding the natural planet equilibrium more and more fossil fuels … our planet will get fat, hot, and dieeeeeeee! a premature death.
/sarc.
See … how easy it is to “think” like an eco-apocalyptic fool? That’s why I look at the science and data … and don’t listen to the rest of their subterfuge. It’s all simplistic nonsense.
Initially I believed in global warming science but once it became obvious that all data corrections, all modifications of historical temperature records, all computer models and all re-definitions (not a complete list) are designed to exaggerate the warming trend…it became unbelievable. In science, corrections and errors tend to go both ways at least some of the time. There’s usually two or more sides that are plausible. Ditto for the effects of global warming- there should be pros and cons but it’s all doom, all the time. From the movie The Matrix:
“Did you know that the first matrix was designed to be a perfect human world, where none suffered, where everybody would be happy. It was a disaster, no one would accept the programming…”
That’s the problem with climate science but the reverse. They have made the CO2 molecule absolutely evil. They have tried too hard to make sure the temperature never goes down. To attack skeptical research as heresy and to excommunicate skeptical researchers. To ensure there’s no positives to warming. To remove everything and everyone who doesn’t support catastrophic global warming. It defies reality by being too perfectly bad.
The catastrophic anthropogenic global warming Architects should have added more balance to their dystopian tale.
I clicked on a global warming article and while I was reading it I was treated to a pop-up add for a Ford F-150. This is the world in which we live.
What is the matter with you Climate Change Deniers? The UN says this is a matter of life or death!
Carbon dioxide is pollution! The science is settled!!
2 million years ago there were beavers and trees on Ellesmere Island (the most northerly island in Canada – and considerably north of Alaska). Thus the earth was a lot warmer then. The planet is still here and doing fine,
During the last ice age most of Canada was covered by ice: from 3000 ft to 10000 ft thick. I believe Chicago was buried under 1000 ft of ice. In the 1970s the climate scientists told us we were headed for a new ice age. It was proven science.
The sad fact is that the climate scientists don’t really know what causes ice ages and warming.