By SecularAnimist
on December 12th, 2012
Please be aware that the incoherent, rambling, nonsensical comment by “DavidNutzuki”, posted here on 12/11/2012, is spam. That identical text has been repeatedly copied and pasted as a comment on numerous blogs where global warming is discussed, each time with a different name given as the “author”.
By Carbonicus (Atlanta, GA 30328)
on December 14th, 2012
This documents the departure between IPCC predictions and actual temperatures. Actual temps are NOT running higher than they’re predictions, they’re LOWER. http://www.c3headlines.com/2012/11/confirmed-climate-models-experts-unable-to-predict-global-temperatures-climate-research-fails.html
Note that the red line IPCC prediction is the 2 degree C by 2100. If one were to plot the more extreme predictions (your 6.3 - 13.3 F), the departure between IPCC prediction and actual temp would be even greater.
Documentation sea level rise is a fraction of what you’ve claimed here. It’s no more than 2mm/year and is NOT increasing. http://ibis.grdl.noaa.gov/SAT/SeaLevelRise/documents/NOAA_NESDIS_Sea_Level_Rise_Budget_Report_2012.pdf
Yes, emissions are up and atmospheric CO2 levels are up to 390 ppm. So what? Unless and until you can positively identify and quantify human attribution, and prove that the current level (or higher) is actually dangerous (and not according to more failed computer models), higher atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are good for the biosphere, not bad.
Ocean “acidification”. Is this the name you give to an alkaline that is slightly less alkaline than 100 or 1,000 years ago? You convey an image of oceans of bubbling acid. You don’t bother to even inform your readers that the world’s oceans are not “acidic” (i.e. below 7.0 on the pH scale) they’re ALKALINE. You scare them with a “30% increase in ‘acidity’” without bothering to mention that even after this .1 change on the pH scale, the oceans are still ALKALINE (nor do you mention that they contain 63 times more dissloved CO2 than the atmosphere).
Thawing tundra and ice sheets? Again, until there is positive, quantifiable attribution, anything suggesting that human emissions of CO2/GHG’s from burning fossil fuels is responsible for either is pure political science speculation.
You’ve got Heidi Cullen and a bunch of eco-journalists, and a couple of scientists as board members, at least one of whom is in the tank for AGW Thermageddon fear mongering.
How long do you think you can keep this up in the face of empirical evidence (e.g. no statisically significant warming in 16 years, and NOAA saying that 15 years would be enough to prove your models wrong)?
You will ultimately be proven as partisan pseudo-science political advocates. Svensmark and Christy and Spencer and others will end up as Copernicus and Galileo and you will end up as the Catholic church (who learned they were right and the earth was NOT the center of the universe, despite their political “consensus”). Remember, Carbonicus warned you this was going to happen to you long before you became laughingstocks.
Spin bordering on irresponsible lies. Suit yourself. Mother nature doesn’t care about your bullying and misinformation. She’ll be your ultimate arbiter, like she has for the last 16 years.
Good luck. You’re going to need it.
By DavidNutzuki (Detroit)
on December 11th, 2012
Loosing trust from the same world of science is better than another 26 years of exaggerations and fear mongering.
As planet lovers we need clarity from the scientists before we condemn our kids to the greenhouse gas ovens of their climate change crisis. We all want to trust and believe in something or someone but science denied the dangers of their pesticides for decades and literally made environmental protection necessary in the first place. Why do we want this misery to be real? Wouldn’t real planet lovers be happy, not disappointed that the end of life on the planet as we know it was not the crisis they said it was going to be after all?
Considering that even Occupywallstreet does not mention CO2 in its list of demands (because of the bank-funded carbon trading stock markets ruled by corporations) can we please move on from the exaggeration of crisis? You can’t have a little crisis. And if this is the real ultimate emergency they say it is, we will need the global scientific community to say in one voice clearly that this comet hit will happen, not another 26 years of might happen. How close to the edge of no return will they take us before it’s too late to say a crisis “WILL” happen? The IPCC has never said a crisis will happen without being smothered in “maybe” and “likely” and “possibly”. Never has science said a crisis will happen, only might.
History will call this CO2 madness the new Reefer Madness.
Reply to this comment