40 Replies to “Y2Kyoto: Eight Botched Environmental Forecasts”

  1. I’m shocked…shocked I tell you…
    Science isn’t supposed to be guess work, clearly these bright lights don’t have their incomes tied to outcome.
    Cappy

  3. The sad part really is the number of idiots who truly believe in these guys and whatever they say is like it is coming out of the bible.They think they are doing good for the planet,but they are only putting more people in the poor house and onto welfare.Their electric cars are only toys for the rich and famous to get their pictures onto the front page as environmental news.Yet these battery operated electricity guzzlers are doing far more damage to the environment than gas is.A hundred years ago these environmentalists would have been shot or the very least jailed for their lies and scare tactics.Today the Gore,s and Suzuki,s are idolized.A bug doctor and nobody politician.I say we cannot blame the messenger in this one,only the gullible get rich quick fools and their followers.

  6. Only eight?
    Climate Change Is Solar Caused: Latest Research Determines Sun Drives El Niño & La Niña Cycles
    Another Failed AGW Prediction: Global Warming Has Not Caused More Mud & Debris Slides
    Peer-Study Concludes That A Natural Negative Feedback Stopped Melting of Greenland’s Glaciers
    AGW Alarmists Predicted More & Bigger Hailstorms Because of Warming: Peer-Reviewed Study Proves Prediction Wrong
    Another hundred plus fallacies are listed here
    http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/
    Wasted money, bogus claims, give it up already.

  7. I wish the people that had a passion about climate change would wake up and realize this planet will be poisoned to death long before the next ice age or great melt.
    And that pollution is happening in China…. India…. Russia… Africa
    Fight that battle to save us all.
    Now the people with a climate change agenda…… well they will never go away.

  9. Agreed bert. It’s not the loons and their wild-eyed predictions that get me PO’d. A carney huckster is a carney huckster. What really gets me PO’d is the wide-eyed credence given to these charlatans by media sycophants and more importantly by politicians who back these hysterical doomsday rants with my tax dollars. Add to that a hopeless “education” system more bent on indoctrination than true education producing an endless supply of scientific illiterates to swallow this BS. Maybe PT Barnum’s old dictum must be modified to, “There’s a sucker trained every minute.”

  11. Let us see now,
    These “scientists” that prophesied the demise of the natural world are still in the positions and some in positions superior to, that they occupied when they came up with the science fiction.
    It is interesting to follow their self defense of them being wrong.
    It is as though if you are one of the “scientists”, you are free to come up with prophecy of doom or even socialist/communist utopia without anything based in reality.
    Now, there is certain admiration in the academe for those that come up with the wildest ideas, sort of like when you have an office meeting and are told to speak up, no idea is stupid, though certain Gates would beg to differ.
    So, the answer these “scientist” give to questions about them being accurate in their predictions are interesting in so far as they insist on being right on the whole and in error in detail when the whole is the detail.
    Note the first point and the answer: Mark Herbert said. “However, Dr Viner believes that his general predictions are still relevant.”
    And then he is quoted what in baseball is called “safe”: “heavy snow would return occasionally”. Sound very scientific. No?
    So you have a “scientist” that can say something like: in future there will be great floods, there will be great droughts, there will be great hurricanes, there will be tranquility in the climate and so on … and so on. So this “scientist” would cover all the bases and when he gets old can say that he predicted that. Of course he will be right 50% of the time, much like when you say “it’s going to rain tomorrow or maybe not”.
    Many, many people go to school for a long time and learn mostly how to talk in circles and insist that they are right just because. It is frustrating though that nobody calls “stop the BS”

  12. The big mistake made by the likes of Ehrlich, Suzuki, Gore, Hansen etc is that their predictions of environmental calamity are too short term and too precise. They should do like Nostradamus did. They should veil their predictions in vague quatrains and make them for centuries hence so they will be long dead by the time their forecasts are shown to be bogus. There is nothing more pathetic than listening to all these tall foreheads dissemble on why their “scholarly” prophecies flopped.
    Actually none of the environmental doomsday prognostications matter anyway. According to the Mayan calendar it’s all over on Dec. 21, 2012.

  13. “whatever they say is like it is coming out of the bible.”
    ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!!
    of course when the religious right wing christian fundaMENTALists do that every think is hunky dory.

  14. “New BC NDP leader must be a woman, according to obscure rule
    National Post”
    It’s an AGW “obscure rule”. It’s gotta be ’cause it’s “obscure” and it’s “a woman”. Right?
    See also: AGW(sic) Acronyms’ rule: Use ACRs & NUANCE. That’s “obscure”.

  15. “of course when the religious right wing christian fundaMENTALists do that every think is hunky dory.”
    DO WHAT? Give me an example of what you implying here.
    What has been predicted by Christian fundamentalists that is hunky dory.
    RIGHT NOW!

  17. ‘Just follow the money and the power grab trail and it all becomes clear.’ Ken (Kulak). Right you are Ken, Georgie Porgie and unca Mo and all their human hating pals have been chomping at the bit for some human misery for decades. The USA elected a fool or a tool as their President; here in Canada we had the intelligence to elect a man who called the Globull Warming hoax an evil socialist plot and who has attacked pollution – the real threat to man and earth. In the maddness, among the fanatical wild eyed worshipers of the false gods and doom and hate; our Prime Minister and the Czech President (Kate’s ‘Magnificent Bastard’, Mr. Klaus), kept their cool, humoured the fools that would have made blood flow in the streets had they been given the oppertunity, and kept all of us from the talons of all of them. So far…so good. America woke up in Nov. the good still has a chance.

  19. I just returned from a week in Phoenix and Yuma, Arizona. The weather was pleasant, sort of, but unseasonably cold by local standards. The higher mountains around Phoenix were capped with snow on January 1, the day I flew home, and there was a more or less continuous blanket of snow to be seen from northern Arizona all the way to Calgary.

  20. Guys, guys, the predictions, like the science, just have to be tweaked, such as:
    “Within a few years children just aren’t going to know what snow is. Snowfall will be a very rare and exciting event.” Simply tag on “in July.”
    “[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots…[By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” Now just add context such as “if a large comet hit the earth.”
    “Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two degrees by 2010.” Instead of pesky computer models, exchange the phrase “a tree in Siberia.”
    See, it isn’t really that difficult. Try to get with the program, eh.

  21. Is Gore’s book now filed under fiction? It couldn’t really be science fiction, it’s closer to a spoof.

  22. When the climate scientists can accurately tell me what the weather will be like tomorrow I’ll start to listen to them. So far, their track record is not that great.

  23. Does anyone have a suggestion for what I can do with the “Going Green” desk top page-a-day calendar my husband received from a colleague?
    It’s only on the first page and it is already ruffling my feathers most unpleasantly.

  25. “Scientists don’t live by the opinion of Rush Limbaugh and Palin and George W. They live by the support of their colleagues, and I’ve had full support of my colleagues continuously.”
    Do these guys ever read their own words?
    Translation: “all the other lunatics in this asylum agree with me so it MUST be true”!

  26. The money quote is, of course, from Paul Erlich: “I never claimed to predict the future with full accuracy.”
    But of course, these idiots – and ‘idiots’ is the right word for people who continuously go wrong with total confidence – claim to be “accurate enough” to justify derailing the entire world’s energy economy. If they admitted that they weren’t predicting the future “with full accuracy” instead of constantly making claims to infallible omniscience, we’d have fewer demagogues trying to sell us our own civilizational downfall.

  29. Lily, is the paper soft enough to use in the bathroom? Just one sheet per visit, to be environmentally correct.

  30. 2010 was the year that Global Cooling was to begin Now postponed to 2011 IT HAS TO BEGIN SOMETIME.

  31. The stench isn’t coming from the oceans, it’s coming from ‘adacemia’. University funding must be cut drastically, it would force them to focus.

  32. An Engineers Critique of Global Warming Science
    Engineering Approach – where data are critical and there are consequences for
    being wrong; not the Scientist approach – where a theory is the product and it can be right or wrong without repercussions.
    The human control of the climate is not only in doubt, it is Horribly expensive.
    Example – even assuming the greenhouse theory is correct, Waxman-Markey, after doubling not only energy costs, but raising costs of everything tied to energy, would delay Global Warming by 3.8 years, a hundred years from now!
    Any engineered adaptation would be cheap by comparison.
    Is it cheaper to constrain, than to adapt?
    No.
    It is possible to constrain energy use with taxes/fees. But, even if imposed, it is not possible to significantly change climate. An energy-constrained economy will not allow the economic growth to fund technical solutions for adaptation or solutions for control, if they are discovered in the future.
    Those that forecast seem to forget that with people come minds – Minds that innovate to adapt to changes. We are no longer Cavemen.
    “The Alarmist (scientist, journalist, politician etc.) chooses to huddle with other alarmists inside an echo chamber, attacking messengers who arrive, but spends no time to carefully inspect the data that forms his opinions, nor to notice the reporting of fraud”
    Burt Rutan, 2009
    http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm

  33. jema54, ah that Magnificent Bastard Klaus,
    “All of these views are associated with social sciences, not with natural sciences. This is why environmentalism – unlike scientific ecology – does not belong to the natural sciences but is to be classified as an ideology. This fact is, however, not understood by the common people and by numerous politicians.” actually, the entire page is worth the time…
    http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/134
    unclemeat: I remember the acid rain scare well. I remember the coming ice age. I remember when we would be out of all resources. Out of water, out of air, out of everything, and now we’re almost out of freedom too.

  34. Well they had to limit themselves at some number Kate.
    After all the internet is not infinite.

  35. AGW Progress Report: Isn’t AGW a New Yawk unionist botch?
    …-
    “1 week after blizzard, NYC garbage is piled high Wall Street Journal
    Report: NYC Sanitation Supervisors Ignored Duties to Drink Alcohol During Blizzard Fox News
    Slowdown Explained: Everyone Was Drunk or “Sick” Gothamist”
    (google: blizzard)

  36. I’ve been saying this for quite awhile… global warming is about people who live large telling the rest of us how to live small.

  37. I remember the various climatic catastrophes that were supposed to happen in the 1970’s; there was the coming ice age that was going to be triggered by smoke produced from coal fired power plants. It struck me as somewhat silly that nuclear power was under attack then also as burning coal emits far more toxins into the air than a nice clean nuclear plant. The solution then, as now, seemed to be go back and live like a peasant from the middle ages and stop consuming power. I wonder how many of the “scientists” interviewed for the Fox News article followed their own advice.
    The other ecocatastrophe from the 1970’s was the threat of supersonic transport and I have a book somewhere that details the incredible carnage sonic booms would cause to wildlife populations, the atmosphere, etc. I remember while reading this wondering why thunderstorms hadn’t wiped out all animal life if sonic booms were so bad.
    What is needed is an organization for people who are interested in preserving the environment without the statist ideology and TEOTWAWKI-centrism of current “environmental” groups. Greenpiece seems to have not done any protesting in China which is the home to the worlds worst pollution — perhaps the quick bullet to the back of the head approach to idiots hanging banners from smokestacks is a deterrent.

  38. I think of this past thirty years of the AGW and climate change hysteria as being perhaps the greatest instance of mass delusion since that business about Martians attacking the earth in 1938. When you look back and see what has actually happened, place realistic trend lines over the data, and do some really critical thinking about the known facts, it all seems like some sort of joke. Being in my position, a sort of maverick weatherman who has some alternate theories about what really drives weather variations, I also find it frustrating that such a large segment of public opinion has been dragged into this delusion making all of us vulnerable to the economic dislocations that are bound to follow any organized attempt to turn the theory into social practice.
    I’ve seen about as much historical weather data as anyone alive today, I would imagine, and the overwhelming impression it makes on me is that we’ve lived through some of the blandest and least challenging weather of all recorded human history. Perhaps the late Neolithic was a bit blander still, allowing people to take their time dragging huge stones around the countryside, but really, when I read these articles about more frequent severe storms, blah blah, I have to think that the people saying this are either totally ignorant of climate records, or perhaps just in an overheated frenzy from worrying about the fate of polar bears.
    I think all climate change announcements on the media (they think of these segments as news, joke’s on them there) should come with a warning like tobacco products, something like this:
    WARNING — Climate change is an internationl scam designed to fund meaningless research and extremely costly wind farms. Believing in climate change will alter your ability to perceive reality and convince you that ordinary weather events are dangerous and menacing. Charlatans will try to convince you to save the polar bears. Polar bears are large, aggressive, adaptable creatures who thrive near ice-ocean margins, and require no assistance from human beings to stay healthy. There is more chance of you dying of hunger than a polar bear, if these warnings are not heeded.
    Anyway, the boring truth of the matter is that climate averages are always shifting within a fairly wide range and there will probably, from this point onward, always be somebody somewhere willing to construct a theory that ultimately requires you to pay them for each demonstrated item of evidence of their theory, no matter how unsound or irrelevant it may be. What we need to do is isolate the current “climate science” and start a new one, climate realism or such, fund that and stop funding this bunch. There is no other solution. Scientists all stick together, but if more real scientists stopped taking the word of these jokers and looked into their methods and conclusions more rigorously, applying the higher standards of say astronomy to climate science, then these jokers would be sent back to school and in an ideal world, given a few years of probation for our troubles.

  39. Philanthropist at 3:41 PM: “University funding must be cut drastically, it would force them to focus.”
    Hear, hear!!

  40. marc in calgary – thank-you for the link to yet another magnificent speech by the Magnificent Bastard – I enjoy reading such things because Mr. Klaus makes me feel appreciated and understood. I would dearly love to meet Mr. Klaus, I would like to listen and learn and bask in the atmosphere of truth and intelligence that, I am certain, permiates the area in which Mr. Klaus stands.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation