| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: Not sure how much longer they will be able to keep crunching in the UK |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 5561
|
|
| Author |
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Even in German I think the thrust of this message is clear
----------------------------------------http://www.zdf.de/ZDFmediathek/hauptnavigatio...76/Pannen-im-IPCC-Bericht  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I wanted to reply to something, but you guys go so fast, I can't keep up. I can't spend all day at my computer doing this, and I can't post from work. Anyway-- Here's something different: Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report's author now says true estimate is still unknown In a statement the authors of the paper said: "Since publication of our paper we have become aware of two mistakes which impact the detailed estimation of future sea level rise. This means that we can no longer draw firm conclusions regarding 21st century sea level rise from this study without further work. "One mistake was a miscalculation; the other was not to allow fully for temperature change over the past 2,000 years. Because of these issues we have retracted the paper and will now invest in the further work needed to correct these mistakes." Scientists withdraw low-ball estimate of sea level rise — media are confused and anti-science crowd pounces http://climateprogress.org/2010/02/22/sea-level-rise-global-warming/  The Guardian misleadingly presented the news with the headline, “Climate scientists withdraw journal claims of rising sea levels“: Study claimed in 2009 that sea levels would rise by up to 82cm by the end of century – but the report’s author now says true estimate is still unknown. If all one read was the introduction, a reader might get the false impression that sea level rise from global warming is in doubt. However, the retraction instead admits that the paper’s calculations for an upper bound to future sea level rise were incorrect, and sea level rise could be much worse. Siddall’s study, “Constraints on future sea-level rise from past sea-level change,” used paleoclimate reconstructions to predict that sea level rise from global warming would be constrained to between 7 cm and 82 cm (3 to 32 in) by the end of the century, in line with the estimated sea level rise in the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, which excluded possible effects from ice sheets [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Feb 23, 2010 6:49:02 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
FT interview transcript: Steven Chu:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a71cf176-1bff-11df-...s01=1.html?nclick_check=1 The FT's Lionel Barber, Edward Luce and Anna Fifield sat down with Steven Chu, the Nobel prize-winning physicist who became President Barack Obama’s energy secretary just over a year ago, in his office on February 16. This is an edited transcript of the interview. FT: On the climate threat, do you think there is legitimate concern now about the fact that some of the science, even if it's not flawed, it's been misrepresented, which has undermined the case in many people's eyes. SC: First, the main findings of IPCC over the years, have they been seriously cast in doubt? No. I think that if one research group didn't understand some tree ring data and they chose to admit part of that data. In all honesty they should have thrown out the whole data set. But science has a wonderful way of self-correcting on things like that. What the public doesn't understand is that as you go forward there will be these things and they will self correct. On balance if you look at all the things the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the body of experts convened by the United Nations to advise governments in responding to global warming] has been doing over the last number of years, they were trying very hard to put in all the peer-reviewed serious stuff. I've actually always felt that they were taking a somewhat conservative stand on many issues and for justifiable reasons. FT: But as a distinguished scientist yourself, don't you think that the IPCC crossed the line between scientific research and advocacy? SC: I don]t think so. My impression about watching them working is that it is one of the things where they have been held up to a very high standard. FT: In the last three months. SC: No, since the beginning. Since report number one. Their reports get reviewed. Lots of people are asked to take shots at this in a very serious way that I think is all right because what they're saying is so important. It has economic consequences worldwide. They should be able to say that this is serious science and take a somewhat conservative view. If you look at the climate skeptics, I would have to say honestly, what standard are they being held to? It's very asymmetric. They get to say anything they want. In the end, the core of science is deeply self checking. |
||
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
If there's nothing wrong with the existing data and the science is settled why does the UK Met Office feel the need for this?
----------------------------------------http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/022410_metproposal.pdf |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Cold truths about the Northeast's harsh winter: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...2/18/AR2010021803981.html Nor did it even cross my mind that our Snowmageddon, inconvenient though it might be, could meaningfully alter the political debate over climate legislation. That would be idiotic. As comedian Stephen Colbert pointed out, it would be like looking outside at night, seeing the darkness and concluding that "the sun has been destroyed." Found the clip: Colbert proves global warming doesn't exist:   http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-repo...e-off-to-see-the-blizzard |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
It's blindly following the press items that suites the wishfull ain't true thinking without testing, time and again and again and again and again [the pots perfect black body attire showing]... that lament of you're going so fast, let me throw in some more off-the-cuff, classic denilopsphere gossip. I call this the "don't look further than nose-tip vision"
----------------------------------------IPCC report made an error, actually a direct publication of a Dutch government official that the Netherlands would be for 55% at risk of flooding due SLR. It was a contraction of 29% below sea level, already and 26% in addition being the flood areas of rivers that would get backed up. As with so many things in the IPCC not daring to give the full exposure, by word of the scientists in the Netherlands who provided the data first to the Dutch government, that at hi tide, with the expected 85cm+ rise, 60% would be at risk of flooding, not 55%. Wonder where they are going to move the trillions of Euro's worth of real estate when it happens? Now would those tinfoil covered toilets start backing up when the sea level rises by 85 cm?
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Ah the joys of dealing with 2 of the possibly most vehement denialists you have ever had the pleasure to encounter.
---------------------------------------- Keep up the good work lads Quick word of advice When you are in a hole, stop digging! Night all I have enough of this nonsense for today I need my ZZzz's these days. Roll on tomorrow Dave |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Ah the joys of dealing with 2 of the possibly most vehement denialists you have ever had the pleasure to encounter. Keep up the good work lads Quick word of advice When you are in a hole, stop digging! Night all I have enough of this nonsense for today I need my ZZzz's these days. Roll on tomorrow Dave Believe the crown of denial belongs on your head, not ours. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Ah the joys of dealing with 2 of the possibly most vehement denialists you have ever had the pleasure to encounter. Keep up the good work lads Quick word of advice When you are in a hole, stop digging! Night all I have enough of this nonsense for today I need my ZZzz's these days. Roll on tomorrow Dave Believe the crown of denial belongs on your head, not ours. You are the denier http://www.climategate.com/worlds-biggest-coa...to-court-in-climate-fraud |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
|
||
|
|
|