IPPC (European Government) Global Warming report 2001.

The opening to this report copied below...

The climate of the Earth as a whole
depends on factors that influence the radiative balance, such as for
example, the atmospheric composition, solar radiation or volcanic
eruptions. To understand the climate of our planet Earth and its
variations and to understand and possibly predict the changes of
the climate brought about by human activities, one cannot ignore
any of these many factors and components that determine the
climate. We must understand the climate system, the complicated
system consisting of various components, including the dynamics
and composition of the atmosphere, the ocean, the ice and snow
cover, the land surface and its features, the many mutual
interactions between them, and the large variety of physical,
chemical and biological processes taking place in and among
these components.

This opening fairly-well substantiates what MajorKong said when he wrote...

That said, merely demonstrating that CO2 absorbs some IR does nothing to prove AGW.
Lots of things in the air absorb IR. H2O being a prime example. Heck, even O2 does.
The HARD part, the part we do NOT understand is the 'what happens from then on' part. It is a sequence of one HARD problem after another.

Clearly you cannot isolate just CO2 as being the root cause behind AGW.
Understanding how climates works, it's natural cycles of warming/cooling
do need to be understood too. Geochemical CO2 and other gas emissions
from volcanoes and earth quakes needs also to understood.

The composite equation to all this is very complicated especially where
variable parameters of this equation are involved. (Var.1) natural global
warming/cooling cycles. (Var.2) natural background CO2 emissions. (Var.3)
natural tiltations of the the Earth. (Var.4) natural fluctuations in the
temerature of the sun. (Var.5) CO2 emission by humans and animals. (Var.6)
natural geochemical CO2 and other gas emissions.

So it can be seen from the above, a lot needs to be understood about a lot
of things not understood before we can point a finger at any one of them.
For one of the above to be a sole cause of AGW then it has to be having
a massive effect overall. CO2 generated by us humans in all it's forms
is just not high enough to be the sinner behind Global Warming, well, not
yet anyway.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

Fair enough -- note to those who hold those unbelievable views that there is global warming and that the icecaps are melting and that the ocean is rising -- sell off your low lying real estate to those who believe otherwise and are willing to part with their 'cold hard' for the opportunity. At the same time, make sure to lobby against government supports for coastal line flood insurance and government emergency interventions for hurricanes and coastal flooding -- as THAT is socialism for sure, after all the government is supposed to work on inconsequential.

As both global warming and 'no global warming' are belief systems with differing world views, in a capitalist society people should find the means to make 'cold hard' by trading on the differing views -- put their money where their brain is, so to speak.

Sorry BubbaAZ, that Stuff is Cold Hard Worked For Cash, which goes to The Insurance Premiums.

And Cold Hard Worked For Cash bought The Ocean View.

No Denying how Warm it is On A Sunny Summer Day at The Beach. Sweet.

Although I much prefer The Cool/Cold Blistery Days at The Beach. I just Roll That Way.

Capitalism and Climate Change. Oh How Sweet It Is.

SPF50Dull

If melting icecap I invented the Internet, Gore was right, by now all of Florida should be under water. It isn't.

In any case let me point out the biosphere experiment. Clearly the experts thought they understood the atmosphere and the interaction with living things. However when they ran the experiment they quickly found out something else was going on. Warmers hate this, and will do everything they can to discredit this, because if it is correct it means warmers are going FUD on GIGO models.

Now back to that melting but never evaporating water so the sea level rises, uh, warm some water and see what happens to it. Also you might try putting an ice cube or two in a glass and filling it to the brim and see what happens when it melts. That is your arctic ocean and polar ice cap.

---

Hyperbole alert -- sea level rises being talked about are in the range of inches at most annually. So owning sea level property is ok for you if you of a certain age, but perhaps not to be passed on. Florida is definitely low lying, but we're talking land level altitudes in at least 10's of feet above current sea level.

It is more a future level question, and I can understand not worrying too much about how things will be in 2050 (I'm 60 myself and have no children). I find it interesting that some of the same folks who don't worry about global warming worry so much about Social Security funding. I suppose one could tell them not to worry about things 20 years from now. Me, I'm strange I guess, I worry about both.

I suppose it's an internal logic thing for me. Similarly, I find the folks decrying any form of birth control but advocating capital punishment a bit logically odd. Again, that's just me.

If melting icecap I invented the Internet, Gore was right, by now all of Florida should be under water. It isn't.

Again, that's just me.

There are so many reasons The Sea Can Rise Up And Inundate. Quickly. Like minutes and hours.

In Escape From LA, the Character played by P. Fonda and K. Russell had their boards at the ready for The Event. And Hang Ten they did.

There are just as many reasons for The Land to Quickly fall out from under us.

The Social Security Checks come Monthly and are Needed Desperately by Most as soon as recieved. Worry about Sea Level Rise Decades From Now. Hardly the same.

An Embryo/Fetus/Baby/Child are Completely Innocent. A Murderer on Death Row, Not So Much. Again, Hardly the same.

For Most of Us with Reason, The Logic is Not Odd at All.

When a Porpoise or Whale sticks its head out of The Water and tells me To Run For Your Life, then I'll Worry, As I Run.

MarathonDull

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Good collection there from Major Kong...

OK, so to keep this simple and with few words, I'll try some videos to show some small steps.

And there is one last scary one for everyone...


OK, so firstly, a demonstration of the physics of what's happening with our atmosphere:


Youtube: CO2 experiment

Youtube: CO2-Ink Demonstration (And note our atmosphere is far deeper than those jars...)

Youtube: Mythbusters tests global warming theory - does CO2 warm air?



It's our only planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Following on, with a little entertainment:


Youtube: Blue Man Group on Global Warming

Youtube: Sir David Attenborough: The Truth About Climate Change (And how fast is 'rapid'?)



It's our only planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

And NOW... The promised must-see scary one:


Youtube: The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See (Even if we do not know exactly.)



It's our only planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Meanwhile, at the 'top of the world' this is already happening:


Polar bear 'cannibalism' pictured

... an image that is sure to shock many people.

An adult polar bear is seen dragging the body of a cub that it has just killed across the Arctic sea ice.

Polar bears normally hunt seals but if these are not available, the big predators will seek out other sources of food - even their own kind. ...

... "This type of intraspecific predation has always occurred to some extent," she told BBC News.

"However, there are increasing numbers of observations of it occurring, particularly on land where polar bears are trapped ashore, completely food-deprived for extended periods of time due to the loss of sea ice as a result of climate change." ...

... "On land, they're looking for human garbage and human foods; they're starting to prey on seabirds and their eggs.

"None of those alternative foods can support them, but they are seeking them out. ...



It's our only planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

For those sitting comfortably, here's a lecture summarising the history of 'Global Warming' (or, a history of conspiracy?):


Youtube, 1 hour program: The American Denial of Global Warming

... "A great geophysical experiment"...

... "The greatest deception in the history of science"...


Yes, there is indeed an amazing conspiracy there. Please see for yourself where the conspiracy has arisen from.

It's our only planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Good collection there from Major Kong...

OK, so to keep this simple and with few words, I'll try some videos to show some small steps.

And there is one last scary one for everyone...


OK, so firstly, a demonstration of the physics of what's happening with our atmosphere:


Youtube: CO2 experiment

Youtube: CO2-Ink Demonstration (And note our atmosphere is far deeper than those jars...)

Youtube: Mythbusters tests global warming theory - does CO2 warm air?

Thanks for those video links ML, good to see children getting involved in
the sciences.

The second video is very significant, not in the density of ink molecules
seen in the jars of water, but in the figure of 38% increase in CO2 ppm
since the onset of industialisation. This rise in CO2 equates to a rise
of just over 1 degree centigrade in average planetary temperatures. If
CO2 levels are still on the increase why has the average planetary
temperatures now levelled out without any reported increase since 1996.
This is a fundamental question that needs to be satisfactorily answered.
Without a satisfactory answer to this question then the CO2 case is dead on
it's feet. A reason why I place this CO2 outside the equation to the
real source behind purported global warming.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

... why has the average planetary temperatures now levelled out without any reported increase since 1996...

Note that context is important... What source do you have for that claim?


All our only world,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... why has the average planetary temperatures now levelled out without any reported increase since 1996...

Note that context is important... What source do you have for that claim?

Write to the European Commission in Brussels and request a copy of their latest report on climate change.
If they are kind enough to send you a copy then give
it a thorough read. Next ask your local MEP if he would kindly obtain for
you a copy of this same report but in draft form. The reason for all this
is so that you can view the difference between the two copies of the same
report. If at this point you manage to obtain the two copies note the
striking difference between the two in relation to average world temperatures.
The draft copy has this information available within it, the published copy
of the report has this data omitted. The draft copy states that there has
been no increase in average world temperatures over the past 15 years.
The above has been publicly reported by an UK IND MEP, had he been lying
over this issue he would have been subpoenaed for it. No such writ has been
issued against him that's because he is telling the truth. His disclosure
only goes to support those who have publicly stated that average world
temperatures have not increased at least since year 2000.

Question: Why did the Commissions published report have this data omitted?

Skulduggery comes to mind here, so we both have to independently search
for the truth by our own independent means.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

... why has the average planetary temperatures now levelled out without any reported increase since 1996...

Note that context is important... What source do you have for that claim?

Write to the European Commission in Brussels ... Next ask your local MEP if he would kindly obtain for you a copy of this same report ... view the difference between the two copies ... average world temperatures have not increased at least since year 2000.

Question: Why did the Commissions published report have this data omitted?

Skulduggery comes to mind here, so we both have to independently search
for the truth by our own independent means.

And such is the source of conspiracy theories...

You already have these documents yourself?

Far easier is if you can post images of the relevant pages so that we can all see for ourselves what it is that you are looking at.


Sorry, but to go on a wild chase will take far longer than the life of this thread. Please post the relevant pages that you have so that we can see for ourselves...

Is that your only hard evidence that we can continue to pollute our planet without consequence?


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Sorry, but to go on a wild chase will take far longer than the life of this thread. Please post the relevant pages that you have so that we can see for ourselves...

You don't have to appologies, I will see what I can get my hands on.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

ML, Any draft copies of EC reports are not made available for release
into the public domain, not very surprised by this.

What I have managed to do is locate a reference to the data having
been excluded from the EC published report. I do gather though that
this reference to average global temperatures staying static over
the past 15 years is unchangeable, it is an accepted fact by all
parties. Currently for this year (2011) the average global temperature
has dropped.

I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.

Surely, if true, the Windmill brigade will have to at least slow down; maybe they will even apologise for their ignorance!

The headline is taken from a Telegraph article, by James Delingpole:
Uh oh, global warming loons: here comes Climategate II!
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100119087/uh-oh-global-warming-loons-here-comes-climategate-ii

but there is also an article in the Guardian, by Leo Hickman:
Fresh round of hacked climate science emails leaked online
A file containing 5,000 emails has been made available in an apparent attempt to repeat the impact of 2009's similar release
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/22/fresh-hacked-climate-science-emails


From the Telegraph article:
I particularly like the ones expressing deep reservations about the narrative put about by the IPCC:
/// The IPCC Process ///
<1939> Thorne/MetO:
Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical
troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a
wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the
uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these
further if necessary [...]
<3066> Thorne:
I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it
which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.
<1611> Carter:
It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much
talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by
a select core group.
<2884> Wigley:
Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive [...] there have been a number of
dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC [...]
not helped, as you know, by the European Commission on climate control excluding data that shows that average global temperatures have not increased since 1996; ref. Monckton MEP:
<4755> Overpeck:
The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s
included and what is left out.
<3456> Overpeck:
I agree w/ Susan [Solomon] that we should try to put more in the bullet about
“Subsequent evidence” [...] Need to convince readers that there really has been
an increase in knowledge – more evidence. What is it?
And here's our friend Phil Jones, apparently trying to stuff the IPCC working groups with scientists favourable to his cause, while shutting out dissenting voices.
<0714> Jones:
Getting people we know and trust [into IPCC] is vital – hence my comment about
the tornadoes group.
<3205> Jones:
Useful ones [for IPCC] might be Baldwin, Benestad (written on the solar/cloud
issue – on the right side, i.e anti-Svensmark), Bohm, Brown, Christy (will be
have to involve him ?)
Here is what looks like an outrageous case of government – the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs – actually putting pressure on climate "scientists" to talk up their message of doom and gloom in order to help the government justify its swingeing climate policies:
<2495> Humphrey/DEFRA:
I can’t overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a
message that the Government can give on climate change to help them tell their
story. They want the story to be a very strong one and don’t want to be made
to look foolish.
Here is a gloriously revealing string of emails in which activists and global warming research groups discuss how best to manipulate reality so that climate change looks more scary and dangerous than it really is:
<3655> Singer/WWF:
we as an NGO working on climate policy need such a document pretty soon for the
public and for informed decision makers in order to get a) a debate started and
b) in order to get into the media the context between climate
extremes/desasters/costs and finally the link between weather extremes and
energy
<0445> Torok/CSIRO:
[...] idea of looking at the implications of climate change for what he termed
“global icons” [...] One of these suggested icons was the Great Barrier Reef [...]
It also became apparent that there was always a local “reason” for the
destruction – cyclones, starfish, fertilizers [...] A perception of an
“unchanging” environment leads people to generate local explanations for coral
loss based on transient phenomena, while not acknowledging the possibility of
systematic damage from long-term climatic/environmental change [...] Such a
project could do a lot to raise awareness of threats to the reef from climate
change
<4141> Minns/Tyndall Centre:
In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public
relations problem with the media
Kjellen:
I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global
warming
Pierrehumbert:
What kind of circulation change could lock Europe into deadly summer heat waves
like that of last summer? That’s the sort of thing we need to think about.

etc

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

... I do gather though that this reference to average global temperatures staying static over the past 15 years is unchangeable, it is an accepted fact by all parties. Currently for this year (2011) the average global temperature has dropped.

Are you referring to this?

Global Temperature News

... La Niña conditions have made 2011 a relatively cool year – relatively, because they predict it will still rank amongst the 10 hottest years on record. They further predict it will be the warmest La Niña year on record (those are the blue years in the bar graph above).


Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

La Niña conditions have made 2011 a relatively cool year – relatively, because they predict it will still rank amongst the 10 hottest years on record. They further predict it will be the warmest La Niña year on record (those are the blue years in the bar graph above).

We wait and see how accurate this prediction is.
I don't like predictions though, let down by the one stating back
over ten years ago that the UK would have continental summers?

Something to ponder over though, "Who's pumping out the true story"...
...Professor Phil Jones (University of East Anglia) or....
...Professor Richard Linden (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

La Niña conditions have made 2011 a relatively cool year – relatively, because they predict it will still rank amongst the 10 hottest years on record. They further predict it will be the warmest La Niña year on record (those are the blue years in the bar graph above).

We wait and see how accurate this prediction is.
I don't like predictions though, let down by the one stating back
over ten years ago that the UK would have continental summers?

Something to ponder over though, "Who's pumping out the true story"...
...Professor Phil Jones (University of East Anglia) or....
...Professor Richard Linden (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Ah yes... Very famous names.

I would describe Professor Phil Jones as a hard working professor somewhat out of his depth when it comes to the painful glare of media intrusion. He has also suffered some vicious threats and media attacks. All very unscientific.

And then there is the Quixotic Professor Linden, fiercely intelligent and yet:

Shame on Richard Lindzen, MIT’s uber-hypocritical anti-scientific scientist

... it is Lindzen who is far more richly rewarded for spreading anti-science than Broecker ever has been before explaining science: "Lindzen, for his part, charges oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services." ...


A question of motivation beyond science?

Have you taken the interest to watch the 'great science swindle' already linked to in earlier posts?



Still our only one planet,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I would describe Professor Phil Jones as a hard working professor somewhat out of his depth when it comes to the painful glare of media intrusion. He has also suffered some vicious threats and media attacks. All very unscientific.

And then there is the Quixotic Professor Linden, fiercely intelligent and yet:

Both with possible skeletons in their cupboards.

Quite honestly Martin one gets feed up with all these videos around.
We both should have studied to become climatologists, we could have
made plenty of money from this irrespective of who's side of the fence
we stood on. For sure though both of us would have then found the truth....
....But which one of us will have been telling it? both I'm sure....

..."Merry Christmas"...

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.