Posts
Global Warming is a Bitch, I have been Freezing my Ass off while digging out from all the Snow.
Maybe when the Global Freezing starts, it will help melt it all away.
(CNN) -- Bitter cold temperatures plunged into Texas and the Deep South Thursday as a massive winter storm exited the United States for the Canadian Maritimes.
The backside of the historic weather system that has already dumped nearly 2 feet of snow in some locales was still powerful enough to drop several more inches of snow on Maine and New Hampshire on Thursday, the National Weather Service forecast.
The Arctic cold front complicated cleanup efforts and spurred freeze warnings that spanned much of the nation's midsection.
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Climate Change Causes Illegal Immigration ?
Who is the Nitwit that thought up this Study ?
So if there is a rise in Temperatures The United States will be flooded with more Migrants ( A nice way of saying Illegal Immigrant )
Just the United states ?
BBC
A warming climate could see millions of adult Mexicans migrate to the US as rising temperatures cause a drop in crop yields, according to a study by researchers at Princeton University.
For every 10% of lost crop yields in Mexico, another 2% of Mexicans are likely to leave their country, the study says.
The research draws a clear connection between climate change and immigration - two heavily debated issues in the US.
It says warming may bring between 1.4m and 6.7m Mexicans to the US by 2080.
So if there is a rise in Temperatures The United States will be flooded with more Migrants ( A nice way of saying Illegal Immigrant )
Just the United states ?
BBC
A warming climate could see millions of adult Mexicans migrate to the US as rising temperatures cause a drop in crop yields, according to a study by researchers at Princeton University.
For every 10% of lost crop yields in Mexico, another 2% of Mexicans are likely to leave their country, the study says.
The research draws a clear connection between climate change and immigration - two heavily debated issues in the US.
It says warming may bring between 1.4m and 6.7m Mexicans to the US by 2080.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Critics Give U.N. Climate Researchers an 'F'
More confirmation over what we already Know , the U.N. has tried to pull their B.S. right over our eyes !
False info , A student theses , literature from a green advocacy group , all included in their findings for their argument IN FAVOR OF Their view of Global warming ! That's Not BIAS is it ?
And how has this affected us Americans ?
Americans tax Dollars going to support Climate change issues (Under false findings)
Having to hear Al Gore .
Being Demonized over our choices of how we live , what we drive , by people who believe in Phony Science !
Having to deal With Al Gores Movie ( Which I still Have not and will not watch )
Being brow beaten by Smelly hippie Douchbags that think they are right , though they can't even read and just will not shower because it is better for the planet for them to just be offensive !
And having to listen to Al Gore !
I'm all for saving the Planet , but lets do it like grown ups , not like elitist Nitwits !
Foxnews
It may be time for the United Nations' climate-studies scientists to go back to school.
A group of 40 auditors -- including scientists and public policy experts from across the globe -- have released a shocking report card on the U.N.'s landmark climate-change research report.
And they gave 21 of the report's 44 chapters a grade of "F."
The team, recruited by the climate-change skeptics behind the website NoConsensus.org, found that 5,600 of the 18,500 sources in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Nobel Prize-winning 2007 report were not peer reviewed.
"We've been told this report is the gold standard," said Canadian global-warming skeptic Donna Laframboise, who runs the NoConsensus.org site and who organized the online effort to examine the U.N.'s references in the report, commonly known as the AR4.
The cover of the IPCC's fourth assessment report to the U.N., "Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report," more frequently referred to as AR4.
"We've been told it's 100 percent peer-reviewed science. But thousands of sources cited by this report have been nowhere near a scientific journal."
Based on the grading system used in American schools, 21 chapters in the IPCC report received an F for citing peer-reviewed sources less than 60 percent of the time. Four chapters received a D, and six received a C.
The report also got eight A's and five B's from the auditors, who included Bob Ashworth, a member of the American Geophysical Union, and Dr. Darko Butina, a director of Chemomine Consultancy Ltd.
According to Lafromboise, much of the scientific research published by the U.N. cited press releases, newspaper and magazine clippings, student theses, newsletters, discussion papers, and literature published by green advocacy groups. Such material is often called "gray literature," she said, and it stands in stark contrast to the U.N.'s claims about the study's sources.
In June 2008, Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC's chairman, said: "People can have confidence in the IPCC's conclusions, given that it is all on the basis of peer-reviewed literature.
"We don't pick up a newspaper article and, based on that, come up with our findings," he told a group at the Commonwealth Club.
False info , A student theses , literature from a green advocacy group , all included in their findings for their argument IN FAVOR OF Their view of Global warming ! That's Not BIAS is it ?
And how has this affected us Americans ?
Americans tax Dollars going to support Climate change issues (Under false findings)
Having to hear Al Gore .
Being Demonized over our choices of how we live , what we drive , by people who believe in Phony Science !
Having to deal With Al Gores Movie ( Which I still Have not and will not watch )
Being brow beaten by Smelly hippie Douchbags that think they are right , though they can't even read and just will not shower because it is better for the planet for them to just be offensive !
And having to listen to Al Gore !
I'm all for saving the Planet , but lets do it like grown ups , not like elitist Nitwits !
Foxnews
It may be time for the United Nations' climate-studies scientists to go back to school.
A group of 40 auditors -- including scientists and public policy experts from across the globe -- have released a shocking report card on the U.N.'s landmark climate-change research report.
And they gave 21 of the report's 44 chapters a grade of "F."
The team, recruited by the climate-change skeptics behind the website NoConsensus.org, found that 5,600 of the 18,500 sources in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Nobel Prize-winning 2007 report were not peer reviewed.
"We've been told this report is the gold standard," said Canadian global-warming skeptic Donna Laframboise, who runs the NoConsensus.org site and who organized the online effort to examine the U.N.'s references in the report, commonly known as the AR4.
The cover of the IPCC's fourth assessment report to the U.N., "Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report," more frequently referred to as AR4.
"We've been told it's 100 percent peer-reviewed science. But thousands of sources cited by this report have been nowhere near a scientific journal."
Based on the grading system used in American schools, 21 chapters in the IPCC report received an F for citing peer-reviewed sources less than 60 percent of the time. Four chapters received a D, and six received a C.
The report also got eight A's and five B's from the auditors, who included Bob Ashworth, a member of the American Geophysical Union, and Dr. Darko Butina, a director of Chemomine Consultancy Ltd.
According to Lafromboise, much of the scientific research published by the U.N. cited press releases, newspaper and magazine clippings, student theses, newsletters, discussion papers, and literature published by green advocacy groups. Such material is often called "gray literature," she said, and it stands in stark contrast to the U.N.'s claims about the study's sources.
In June 2008, Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC's chairman, said: "People can have confidence in the IPCC's conclusions, given that it is all on the basis of peer-reviewed literature.
"We don't pick up a newspaper article and, based on that, come up with our findings," he told a group at the Commonwealth Club.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
UN climate change chief Rajendra Pachauri says sorry — and switches to neutral
Attention EPA ,
In an interview with The Times, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, apologised for his organisation’s handling of complaints about errors in its report.
Errors ? Try LIES !
“I will try to clarify that I’m not prescribing anything as a solution. Maybe I should be more careful [in media interviews] in laying down certain riders. One learns from that and I’m learning.”
Really , You should be more Careful and Al Gore should also .
If there was a way to calculate all the money spent on the lies of Global Warming , by way of increased Taxes , increased fuel costs , and time wasted by governments spinning their wheels to keep up with a completely False Idea , I wish it to be done .(And there are many more wastes of money , I can't think of them all )
And the results should be divided up between the Conspirators of Global warming so as to repay the Money to all the Governments and the People !
We have been paying for these lies for years and it is beyond time to stop .
Timesonline
The outspoken chairman of the UN’s climate change body is to adopt a neutral advisory role and has agreed to stop making statements demanding new taxes and other radical policies on cutting emissions.
In an interview with The Times, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, apologised for his organisation’s handling of complaints about errors in its report.
He also apologised for describing as “voodoo science” an Indian Government report which challenged the IPCC’s claims about the rapid melting of Himalayan glaciers.
But Dr Pachauri, 70, rejected calls for his resignation and insisted he would remain as chairman until after publication of the IPCC’s next report in 2014.
He claimed he had the support of all the world’s governments and denied that, by remaining in post, he was undermining the IPCC’s chances of regaining credibility with the public.
“It is not correct to say there are people who don’t trust me,” he said.
He admitted it had been a mistake to give the impression, in many interviews, that he was advocating specific actions to cut emissions. Last year, he called for higher taxes on aviation and motoring, said people should eat less meat, and proposed that hotel rooms should have electricity meters to charge people extra for using air conditioning.
Speaking in London yesterday, he said he would focus in future on presenting the science on climate change rather than advocating policies.
“I will try to clarify that I’m not prescribing anything as a solution. Maybe I should be more careful [in media interviews] in laying down certain riders. One learns from that and I’m learning.”
In an interview with The Times, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, apologised for his organisation’s handling of complaints about errors in its report.
Errors ? Try LIES !
“I will try to clarify that I’m not prescribing anything as a solution. Maybe I should be more careful [in media interviews] in laying down certain riders. One learns from that and I’m learning.”
Really , You should be more Careful and Al Gore should also .
If there was a way to calculate all the money spent on the lies of Global Warming , by way of increased Taxes , increased fuel costs , and time wasted by governments spinning their wheels to keep up with a completely False Idea , I wish it to be done .(And there are many more wastes of money , I can't think of them all )
And the results should be divided up between the Conspirators of Global warming so as to repay the Money to all the Governments and the People !
We have been paying for these lies for years and it is beyond time to stop .
Timesonline
The outspoken chairman of the UN’s climate change body is to adopt a neutral advisory role and has agreed to stop making statements demanding new taxes and other radical policies on cutting emissions.
In an interview with The Times, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, apologised for his organisation’s handling of complaints about errors in its report.
He also apologised for describing as “voodoo science” an Indian Government report which challenged the IPCC’s claims about the rapid melting of Himalayan glaciers.
But Dr Pachauri, 70, rejected calls for his resignation and insisted he would remain as chairman until after publication of the IPCC’s next report in 2014.
He claimed he had the support of all the world’s governments and denied that, by remaining in post, he was undermining the IPCC’s chances of regaining credibility with the public.
“It is not correct to say there are people who don’t trust me,” he said.
He admitted it had been a mistake to give the impression, in many interviews, that he was advocating specific actions to cut emissions. Last year, he called for higher taxes on aviation and motoring, said people should eat less meat, and proposed that hotel rooms should have electricity meters to charge people extra for using air conditioning.
Speaking in London yesterday, he said he would focus in future on presenting the science on climate change rather than advocating policies.
“I will try to clarify that I’m not prescribing anything as a solution. Maybe I should be more careful [in media interviews] in laying down certain riders. One learns from that and I’m learning.”
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Al's Latest Global-Warming Whopper / Or how Al gore is a fat ass liar !
O.k. so Al gore is a liar , we know this now !
what is to be done now that Global warming has been exposed as the Biggest hoax perpetrated by a politician ?
What about all the tax Dollars that have been wasted ?
A Refund ?
protecting the environment is very important , but should we be subject to ridicule , extreme legislation and badgering in the name of a lie ?
no we should not .
How about some real science , let us try that for a change instead of hearing Bullshit out of a Jackass like Al Gore !
what is to be done now that Global warming has been exposed as the Biggest hoax perpetrated by a politician ?
What about all the tax Dollars that have been wasted ?
A Refund ?
protecting the environment is very important , but should we be subject to ridicule , extreme legislation and badgering in the name of a lie ?
no we should not .
How about some real science , let us try that for a change instead of hearing Bullshit out of a Jackass like Al Gore !
....
Al Gore's defense of global-warming hysteria in Sunday's New York Times has many flaws, but I'll focus on just one whopper -- where the "Inconvenient Truth" man states the opposite of scientific fact.
Gore wrote, "The heavy snowfalls this month have been used as fodder for ridicule by those who argue that global warming is a myth, yet scientists have long pointed out that warmer global temperatures have been increasing the rate of evaporation from the oceans, putting significantly more moisture into the atmosphere -- thus causing heavier downfalls of both rain and snow in particular regions, including the Northeastern United States."
It's an interesting theory, but where are the facts?
According to "State of the Climate" from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, "Global precipitation in 2009 was near the 1961-1990 average." And there was certainly no pattern of increasing rain and snow on America's East Coast during the post-1976 years, when NOAA says the globe began to heat up.
So what was it, exactly, that Gore's nameless scientists "have long pointed out"? A 2008 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Climate Change and Water," says climate models "project precipitation increases in high latitudes and part of the tropics." In other areas, the IPCC reports only "substantial uncertainty in precipitation forecasts."
In other words, the IPCC said that its models predicted some increases in rain or snow -- not observed them. And only in high latitudes or the tropics, which hardly describes New York or Washington, DC.
In fact, recent research actually contradicts Gore's claims about "significantly more water moisture in the atmosphere."
In late January, Scientific American reported: "A mysterious drop in water vapor in the lower stratosphere might be slowing climate change," and noted that "an apparent increase in water vapor in this region in the 1980s and 1990s exacerbated global warming."
The new study came from a group of scientists, mainly from the NOAA lab in Boulder. The scientists found: "Stratospheric water-vapor concentrations decreased by about 10 percent after the year 2000 . . . This acted to slow the rate of increase in global surface temperature over 2000 to 2009 by about 25 percent."
Specifically, the study found that water vapor rising from the tropics has been reduced, because it has gotten cooler there (another inconvenient truth). A Wall Street Journal headline summed it up: "Slowdown in Warming Linked to Water Vapor."
Moisture in the lower stratosphere (about 8 miles above the earth's surface) has been going down, not up.
Aside from clouds, water vapor accounts for as much as two-thirds of the earth's greenhouse-gas effect. Water vapor traps heat from escaping the atmosphere -- but clouds have the opposite effect (called "albedo") by reflecting the sun's energy back into space. And snow on the ground from the IPCC's predicted precipitation in high latitudes would have the same cooling effect as clouds.
What the new research suggests is that changes in water vapor may well trump the effect of carbon dioxide (only a fraction of which is man-made) and methane (which has mysteriously slowed since about 1990).
This raises an intriguing question: Since the Environmental Protection Agency declared that it has the authority to regulation carbon emissions because of their presumed effect on the global climate, why hasn't the EPA also attempted to regulate mist and fog?
Saturday, February 27, 2010
You Can Call Him Al ... But Al Won't Call You Back
You can't expect the great Al Gore , to speak the truth about Global warming , not when he has these kind of thoughts on his mind ...
at the IBM Pulse Conference in Las Vegas, Gore commented on how the environment was a fantastic business opportunity.
Yes money , that is all it comes down to ! Our money in big Al Gore's pocket , he does not really love the environment he loves the money he gets from scaring the hell out of everyone .
Foxnews
Al Gore won a Nobel Prize and an Oscar for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. But in the last three months, as global warming has gone from a scientific near-certitude to the subject of satire, Gore -- the public face of global warming -- has been silent on the topic.
The former vice president apparently finds it inconvenient even to answer calls to testify before the U.S. Senate. You can call him Al . . . but he won't call back.
On Tuesday, Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe -- a prominent skeptic of global warming theory and the Republican leader of the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee -- issued a request for Gore to come testify on global warming. In an interview with FoxNews.com, Inhofe said he wants Gore to appear because "it will be interesting to ask him on what science he based his movie," a film the senator considers "science fiction."
Gore has yet to respond, but that didn't prevent him from causing a stir at Apple's shareholder meeting Thursday. According to CNET, Gore was seated in the first row while several stockholders bashed his high-profile views on climate change. One reportedly said Gore "has become a laughingstock. The glaciers have not melted."
Gore did not reply, and he has not commented on his blog or Twitter feed.
Inhofe says he hopes Gore will address the recent Climate-gate scandals that have besmirched the science, scientists and politicians who back the theory of manmade climate change. Last fall, news outlets in the United Kingdom exposed a scandal in which leading global warming scientists conspired in e-mails to hide data that contradicted "proof" of manmade global warming. Then the world's leaders failed to reach a deal on climate change policy in Copenhagen. And the U.N.'s climate change research body admitted flaws in its report that concluded that the Himalayan glaciers were melting, the Arctic ice cap was fading away, and the Amazon rainforest was in imminent danger.
Since his appearance at the Copenhagen climate summit in December, Gore has been reluctant to talk to the media, making only a handful of public appearances.
On Jan. 16, he spoke at the American Library Association conference at the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center, and he signed copies of his newest book, Our Choice: How We Can Solve the Climate Crisis.On Feb. 22, at the IBM Pulse Conference in Las Vegas, Gore commented on how the environment was a fantastic business opportunity.
Friday, February 19, 2010
EPA, Countering Critics of Greenhouse Gas Findings, Says 'Science Is Settled'
Science is supposed to be founded on Fact .
When a set "theory" is said to be fact without really studying it , it should never be taken as fact .
When evidence is uncovered disproving any theory set before whether fact or not , it should be scientifically Studied .
Having tree hugging hippie douchbags tell everyone that their supposed theory is fact , is not the way to handle this ,
In science you MUST BE IMPARTIAL !
Sometimes in science a proven fact is legitimately proven wrong , it happens all the time .
So for the EPA to just say poo on you about the recent revelations that global warming Has been founded on lies , and knowing that the scientists who are in the EPA are tree hugging hippie douchbags , just goes to show that another government money pit of a organization is working against us innocent people , all so they can justify their existence , and further rape us of our tax dollars .
Foxnews
The Environmental Protection Agency, responding complaints about its December findings about the threat of greenhouse gases, issued a statement Friday saying that the "science is settled" and "greenhouse gases pose a real threat to the American people."
The statement comes after after Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli filed a petition with the EPA and a challenge in federal appeals court over the EPA's conclusions.
With climate scientists in the hot seat recently over an e-mail scandal and mistakes in a prominent U.N. report, Cuccinelli argues the EPA should "restart the process and this time use rigorous, defensible science."
He says the EPA is expected to announces measures to cap carbon emissions, based on its climate change findings, and that will put a "staggering burden" on Virginia residents and businesses.
The EPA says it is going forward with "common sense measures that are helping to protect Americans from this threat" and said its critics are trying to "stall progress."
Some who support the EPA's efforts to enact carbon caps on vehicle emissions say Cuccinelli is just playing politics.
"It's very clear this is coming from lawyers, not scientists, and there's really no new science that needs to be resolved," said Brendan Bell, Washington representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists, a leading nonprofit environmental group.
But the science that climatologists have been using has come under fire. Recently, some parts of the 2007 United Nations Panel Report on Climate Change were found to contain mistakes, including a claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035.
And one of the lead scientists in the Climate-gate scandal last year, Phil Jones, acknowledged that there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995. But he also claims most of the climate warning since 1950 is "due to human activity."
When a set "theory" is said to be fact without really studying it , it should never be taken as fact .
When evidence is uncovered disproving any theory set before whether fact or not , it should be scientifically Studied .
Having tree hugging hippie douchbags tell everyone that their supposed theory is fact , is not the way to handle this ,
In science you MUST BE IMPARTIAL !
Sometimes in science a proven fact is legitimately proven wrong , it happens all the time .
So for the EPA to just say poo on you about the recent revelations that global warming Has been founded on lies , and knowing that the scientists who are in the EPA are tree hugging hippie douchbags , just goes to show that another government money pit of a organization is working against us innocent people , all so they can justify their existence , and further rape us of our tax dollars .
Foxnews
The Environmental Protection Agency, responding complaints about its December findings about the threat of greenhouse gases, issued a statement Friday saying that the "science is settled" and "greenhouse gases pose a real threat to the American people."
The statement comes after after Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli filed a petition with the EPA and a challenge in federal appeals court over the EPA's conclusions.
With climate scientists in the hot seat recently over an e-mail scandal and mistakes in a prominent U.N. report, Cuccinelli argues the EPA should "restart the process and this time use rigorous, defensible science."
He says the EPA is expected to announces measures to cap carbon emissions, based on its climate change findings, and that will put a "staggering burden" on Virginia residents and businesses.
The EPA says it is going forward with "common sense measures that are helping to protect Americans from this threat" and said its critics are trying to "stall progress."
Some who support the EPA's efforts to enact carbon caps on vehicle emissions say Cuccinelli is just playing politics.
"It's very clear this is coming from lawyers, not scientists, and there's really no new science that needs to be resolved," said Brendan Bell, Washington representative for the Union of Concerned Scientists, a leading nonprofit environmental group.
But the science that climatologists have been using has come under fire. Recently, some parts of the 2007 United Nations Panel Report on Climate Change were found to contain mistakes, including a claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035.
And one of the lead scientists in the Climate-gate scandal last year, Phil Jones, acknowledged that there has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995. But he also claims most of the climate warning since 1950 is "due to human activity."
Saturday, January 23, 2010
U.N. Climate Change Expert Cites More Errors in Report
Foxnews
The Indian head of the U.N. climate change panel defended his position Friday even as further errors were identified in the panel's assessment of Himalayan glaciers.
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.
But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.
“I know a lot of climate sceptics are after my blood, but I’m in no mood to oblige them,” he told The Times of London in an interview. “It was a collective failure by a number of people,” he said. “I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.”
The IPCC’s 2007 report, which won it the Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
But it emerged last week that the forecast was based not on a consensus among climate change experts, but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.
The IPCC admitted on Thursday that the prediction was “poorly substantiated” in the latest of a series of blows to the panel’s credibility.
Poorly substantiated , how about an outright Lie !
The Indian head of the U.N. climate change panel defended his position Friday even as further errors were identified in the panel's assessment of Himalayan glaciers.
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri dismissed calls for him to resign over the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change’s retraction of a prediction that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.
But he admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.
“I know a lot of climate sceptics are after my blood, but I’m in no mood to oblige them,” he told The Times of London in an interview. “It was a collective failure by a number of people,” he said. “I need to consider what action to take, but that will take several weeks. It’s best to think with a cool head, rather than shoot from the hip.”
The IPCC’s 2007 report, which won it the Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high."
But it emerged last week that the forecast was based not on a consensus among climate change experts, but on a media interview with a single Indian glaciologist in 1999.
The IPCC admitted on Thursday that the prediction was “poorly substantiated” in the latest of a series of blows to the panel’s credibility.
Poorly substantiated , how about an outright Lie !
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown
The report read: "Glaciers in the Himalaya are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate."
The World has been misled !
Now what does Al Gore have to say ?
Just another nail in the coffin of Global Warming .
Timesonline
A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.
In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.
It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.
The World has been misled !
Now what does Al Gore have to say ?
Just another nail in the coffin of Global Warming .
Timesonline
A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world's glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.
In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC's 2007 report.
It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was "speculation" and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Winter Wonderland ?
Sunday, May 24, 2009
AL Gore you truly are a JACKASS !
Gore, others urge CEOs to back climate change deal
Blah , Blah , Blah ! It is so tiring to hear this same old B.S. , Time after time it has been disproved and every time Al Gore pipes up Again ! If he did not have so much to gain through his business dealings , It might be a different story ! But really , it is just another Liberal , AssMonkey trying to make a Buck at the peoples expense , all the time pushing an agenda very few people believe in !
Al gore You truly are a JACKASS !
Al gore You truly are a JACKASS !
COPENHAGEN (AP) — Climate-change heavyweights U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon
and Nobel prize winner Al Gore urged more than 500 business leaders on
Sunday to lend their corporate muscle to reaching a global deal on
reducing greenhouse gases.
The CEOs of PepsiCo, Nestle, BP and
other of the world's major businesses began meeting in Copenhagen,
where politicians will gather in December to negotiate a new
U.N.-brokered climate treaty.
Despite the global financial
crisis, both Ban and Gore said there was no time for delay in hashing
out the specifics of how to cut greenhouse gases that contribute to
warming the planet.
"We have to do it this year. Not next year.
This year," Gore said. "The clock is ticking, because Mother Nature
does not do bailouts."
The three-day World Business Summit on
Climate Change is a precursor to the negotiations to determine what
will succeed the Kyoto climate treaty that expires in 2012.
"Continuing
to pour trillions of dollars into fossil-fuel subsidies is like
investing in subprime real estate," Ban said. "Our carbon-based
infrastructure is like a toxic asset that threatens the portfolio of
global goods, from public health to food security."
A new global
warming treaty would build on the Kyoto treaty's mixed success in
requiring that 37 industrialized nations reduce greenhouse gas
emissions an average of 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
