Climategate 2.0

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by Watser?

Seriously, Jerome will still argue that everything is fine when he is standing up to his neck in water.

That will be boiling ocean water according to respected scientist Hansen.

[fragment]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

IIRC his models included a volcano or two

Yup. So has reality. Which will create a fair difference in the short-term but shouldn't affect long-term trends. I think everyone acknowledges that Hansen's 1988 model overestimated climate sensitivity.

RealClimate: 2011 Updates to model-data comparisons

The Hansen comparison is last in the post.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by fragment

We do know that Hansen's 1988 model tends to run a bit hot. Still, characterising scenario A as "emissions as actually occurred" is inaccurate. In that scenario CO2 is within a couple ppm of actual, but other greenhouse gas emissions are way off. See here.

All of this is par for the course and just as to be expected. Scientists are not omniscient agents. Their models will undoubtedly be wrong in some important details. How could it be otherwise? What matters is the big picture. In the big picture, the world continues to warm broadly consistent with predictions made a quarter century ago.

[Watser?]

Originally Posted by Jerome

That will be boiling ocean water according to respected scientist Hansen.

I see you ignored the other half of that quote. So who's paying you for this crap?

[fragment]

Yeah, they're not getting their money's worth.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Watser?

I see you ignored the other half of that quote. So who's paying you for this crap?

I haven't read Jerome's link, and I've no doubt he's taking the quote or idea out of context, because he is a liar. However, it's possible that the earth could grow so hot that water would boil away. That could happen for any number of reasons, some of them unrelated to man. The question is, WTF has this got to do with AGW?

If AGW is true, the oceans wouldn't have to boil to kill off humans. If the oceans ever got to the vicinity of boiling, without actually doing so, all life would already be gone, except perhaps for extremophiles.

So wtf are you talking about, Jerome? Do you even know or care?

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by davidm

I haven't read Jerome's link, and I've no doubt he's taking the quote or idea out of context, because he is a liar. However, it's possible that the earth could grow so hot that water would boil away.

So wtf are you talking about, Jerome? Do you even know or care?

Here is Hansen talking about how the oceans will boil.

He says if we can't stop the runaway greenhouse gases "that's the end for everybody"!

Start at 2:12.

The Runaway Greenhouse Effect - James Hansen ...

[LadyShea]

Hansen is asked "What is the runaway greenhouse effect" at 1:54 and he answers that question, including that if it happens the oceans could boil away. Scientifically possible.

Jerome is taking the statement out of context by having people jump to 2:12 and thereby miss the question being asked.

[Watser?]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Jerome is taking the statement out of context

That should be his signature...

[LadyShea]

Jerome, if I asked you "What is volcanic winter" and you answered that question accurately, should you be considered an alarmist?

Hansen answered the question asked.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Jerome

Here is Hansen talking about how the oceans will boil.

He says if we can't stop the runaway greenhouse gases "that's the end for everybody"!

Start at 2:12.

As LadyShea has pointed out, you have taken the quote out of context. Did you think no one would notice this? Are you that stupid?

Also, as I have pointed out, the "oceans boiling away" thing is entirely irrelevant. I notice you dodge this point, probably because you are both stupid and dishonest.

If it got to the point where oceans were about to boil away (but didn't) all life would be gone anyway, except maybe for extremophiles. The oceans don't need to boil away, or come close to doing so, for there to be a climate catastrophe.

Get it now?

[davidm]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Hansen is asked "What is the runaway greenhouse effect" at 1:54 and he answers that question, including that if it happens the oceans could boil away. Scientifically possible.

Jerome is taking the statement out of context by having people jump to 2:12 and thereby miss the question being asked.

This is the strategy of the fossil fuel industry, their well-paid shills and their useful idiots like Jerome. They count on the fact that most people don't think skeptically, and don't think analytically. Rather, most people respond emotionally, and their "thoughts" are thus easily manipulated by emotional appeals.

Har har har! Stoopid scientists predict oceans to boil away! See how dum they is?

Or, put a picture of the Unabomber up next to a line about how he still believes in global warming, but do you? And you hit an emotional trip wire, connecting "radical environmentalism" to the Unabomber to global warming, global warming belief = support for Unabomber!

And the sad thing is it works.

[davidm]

Meanwhile, humankind faces an imminent threat of extinction due to climate change, according to a new scientific study published in the science journal Nature. The article describes some climate-change scientists as "terrified."

[davidm]

Just out of curiosity, I toured the cnn home page to see if there was an article about this study. Well, no. But there is "BREAKING NEWS! Triple Crown hopes dashed; I'll Have Another is injured!"

But then there is something called Mother Nature Network. Surely there...?

Well, no. But there are exciting and vital articles with titles like, "Remember these presidential pooches?" and "Great grill grub for vegetarians!"

LOL

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by davidm

Meanwhile, humankind faces an imminent threat of extinction due to climate change, according to a new scientific study published in the science journal Nature. The article describes some climate-change scientists as "terrified."

"The data suggests that there will be a reduction in biodiversity and severe impacts on much of what we depend on to sustain our quality of life, including, for example, fisheries, agriculture, forest products and clean water. This could happen within just a few generations," stated lead author Anthony Barnosky, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California in Berkeley.

"My colleagues who study climate-induced changes through the Earth's history are more than pretty worried," he said in a press release. "In fact, some are terrified," said co-researcher Arne Mooers, a professor of biodiversity at Simon Fraser University in Canada's British Columbia.

[Jerome]

.. probably taken out of context ...

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Jerome

Were you trying to make a point here, Jerome? If so, what was it?

Meanwhile!

CNN has finally noticed that something is amiss!

In fact, right now it is their lead story.

Here in New York City, we had a major blizzard in October (very unusual) a hurricane in August (very rare) a winter of virtually no snow at all (very rare), a March that was WARM (nothing I ever encountered before) and now it has been announced that the U.S. had the hottest May since record-keeping began.

Hey, Jerome, when are you going to answer the questions that I have put to you in at least two different threads? Let's start with this:

Do you understand that that the oceans actually boiling off has nothing to do with the threat of AGW? And that Hansen was answering a hypothetical about potential worst-case scenarios, not PREDICTING this was going to happen?

Or are you just a little liar?

That's a rhetorical question, btw.

[Jerome]

What predictions does the new paper make which has the lead scientist' "terrified"?

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Jerome

What predictions does the new paper make which has the lead scientist' "terrified"?

LOL. Did you read the paper? It's online. I know you have a limited attention span, though, so:

When are you going to answer the questions that I put to you?

[Watser?]

There's actually more than just that paper.

With forests and fish stocks declining, water demand rising and lack of action on climate change, humanity's path is anything but sustainable, the UN warns.

The Global Environmental Outlook says significant progress is seen on only four out of 90 environmental goals.

...

Among the report's "low-lights" are:

air pollution indoors and outdoors is probably causing more than six million premature deaths each year
greenhouse gas emissions are on track to warm the world by at least 3C on average by 2100
most river basins contain places where drinking water standards are below World Health Organization standards
only 1.6% of the world's oceans are protected.

A few hours after GEO-5's release, the journal Nature published a review of evidence on environmental change concluding that the biosphere - the part of the planet that supports life - could be heading for rapid, possibly irreversible change.

BBC News - Green decline 'may bring irreversible change'

This is also not happening at all, just hearsay:

Warm water fish from the Mediterranean such as anchovy, red mullet, sea bass and John Dory are shoaling northwards into the south coast's waters as sea temperatures rise.

Bluefin tuna, triggerfish and thresher sharks have also been spotted in the English Channel around Hampshire, the Isle of Wight, and Dorset, with marine scientists predicting a large increase in numbers in the next 20 years.

BBC News - Adapting to climate change in the English Channel

Or this:

Earth's glaciers are seriously out of balance with the global climate and are already on their way to losing almost 40% of their volume.

That is the assessment of scientists after studying a representative group of 144 small and large glaciers around the world.

Their figure assumes no further warming of the climate.

BBC News - World's glaciers 'out of balance'

Or this: BBC News - Virginia's dying marshes and climate change denial

or this: Polar bear cubs dying as climate change melts Arctic and forces them on long swims | Mail Online

[davidm]

A correction: according to the cnn article, this has been the second warmest May in the U.S. since record keeping began, though this conflicts with other information I've seen. I'll have to look into it.

According to the article, though, this has been the warmest spring since record-keeping began. And so it goes! And no, Jerome's lies to the contrary notwithstanding, the world did not cool in the last decade. It showed the greatest warming ever recorded.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Watser?

There's actually more than just that paper.

BBC News - Green decline 'may bring irreversible change'

This is also not happening at all, just hearsay:

BBC News - Adapting to climate change in the English Channel

Or this:

BBC News - World's glaciers 'out of balance'

Or this: BBC News - Virginia's dying marshes and climate change denial

or this: Polar bear cubs dying as climate change melts Arctic and forces them on long swims | Mail Online

<jerome>

Australians don't like the carbon tax! Checkmate, warmists!

</jerome>

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by davidm

The world did not cool in the last decade.

It showed the greatest warming ever recorded.

[Watser?]

Do you ever read your own signature?

[davidm]

Originally Posted by Jerome

Checkmate, asshat

It should be noted, of course, that none of this matters. Scientists and others, who are not stupid like Jerome, recognize that average temperatures over a period of years or even a decade might fluctuate up or down for other reasons than global warming. The sun might cool and counteract, for a time, AGW. The forecasts are not for an unbroken upward trend, though that does seem to be happening as of now.