Husk mig
▼ Indhold

Bemærkelsesværdige citater.....



Side 9 af 13<<<7891011>>>
30-01-2010 17:23
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
Et eksempel af hvad man kan læse i dagspressen som opsummering af de sidste måneders diverse klima '-gates' begivenheder

- og nok et eksempel:

Professor Beddington said that particular caution was needed when communicating predictions about climate change made with the help of computer models

- take that!


John Beddington er (UK) "Government's chief scientific adviser".
Resten af interviewet her.
31-01-2010 11:31
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
TIMES OF INDIA: One slip does not change the big picture (31/1-10):

After more than 20 years of concerted international effort, our understanding of the impact of human activity on the climate has improved dramatically. The results are sobering: unchecked, greenhouse gas emissions are leading to higher temperatures and sea levels, greater stresses on water supplies, and changes in ecosystems. They are also a leading factor in the retreat of most of the world's glaciers.

But to judge from the hue and cry emanating from the IPCC's recent withdrawal of its published estimate that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035, one would think that an entire body of knowledge, produced by thousands of scientists, was now in disarray......

Any misstep in the IPCC process is therefore of concern, and must be remedied. But it does not challenge the basis of climate change science, or evidence of global warming that is already visible across the globe.

More scientific research, subject to careful peer review, remains as important as ever...the fundamental trends are clear. Glaciers are in retreat around the globe. In part, this is due to black soot from burning coal and diesel, and the inefficient use of biomass, which darkens the glaciers and makes them soak up more sunlight. In part, it is due to the global rise in temperatures driven largely by the greenhouse gases pumped into the air by human activity, particularly burning fossil fuels.

This assessment is not based on a handful of studies, but on multiple independent lines of evidence that are supported by the collective work of thousands of scientists from institutions worldwide. It relies not on the esoteric, but on the basic laws of physics. And it is a conclusion reached not only by the IPCC but by leading scientific bodies in over a dozen major countries, including India, China and the US

KILDE

Det er kun i den besyndelige parallel verden fremmanede og boet i af klimaskeptikere/benægtere at det sidste tids klima '-gates' har modbevist at menneskers aktiviteter påvirker klimaet og at IPCC betragtes som død og snart begravet.



Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
25-02-2010 20:41
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
REUTERS: World warming unhindered by cold spells: scientists (25/2-10)

Neville Nicholls, Monash University's School of Geography and Environmental Science in Melbourne:

It's not warming the same everywhere but it is really quite challenging to find places that haven't warmed in the past 50 years...

January, according to satellite (data), was the hottest January we've ever seen...

Last November was the hottest November we've ever seen, November-January as a whole is the hottest November-January the world has seen

[he said of the satellite data record since 1979].


Se også videoklip Is This Global Warming? ABC NEWS (11/2-10)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
27-02-2010 08:04
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Fra artiklen Weird Science to the Rescue i THE ATLANTIC (27/2-10):

Climate change is no longer an impending catastrophe to be averted, but an existing condition to be managed.

..the world at large seems to be coming to terms with the reality of a warming planet

Countries around the world haven't been able to agree on the policy changes necessary to stop warming in its tracks. And energy experts warn that most of our alternative energy solutions won't create enough power to get the world to its goal of zero carbon emissions in 40 years. In fact, even if we did get our emissions down, it wouldn't be enough – the climate has already changed. The last time global temperatures were below average was February 10, 1993.

In many ways, the science [of geoengineering] once seen as a last resort is starting to look like the only option.


"..the sentiment among scientists at this year's annual meeting for the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Diego. "


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
01-03-2010 21:29
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Fra DMI: 2010 begyndte med den varmeste januar i 32 år (1/3-10):

På et globalt plan vil El Niño kunne mærkes ved at forhøje den globale gennemsnitstemperatur.

Vær opmærksom på at temperaturen januar 2010 med den nuværende svage El Niño er på samme niveau som temperaturerne i 1997/1998 med dengang ekstremt kraftige El Niño.
Fed skrift min


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
08-03-2010 08:40
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4609)
27-03-2010 09:48
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
William Randel, the lead author of a study led by scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, providing additional evidence of the global nature of air pollution and its effects far above Earth's surface:


The monsoon is one of the most powerful atmospheric circulation systems on the planet, and it happens to form right over a heavily polluted region. As a result, the monsoon provides a pathway for transporting pollutants up to the stratosphere....

This is a vivid example of pollutants altering our atmosphere in subtle and far-reaching ways.


KILDE: Pollution from Asia circles globe at stratospheric heights (National Center for Atmospheric Research - 23/3-10)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
08-04-2010 18:59
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
"De gentegnede grafer"- gate


Frankrigs mest berømte klimaskeptiker, tidligere undervisnings- og forskningsminister Claude Allègre, er blevet taget med bukserne nede i forbindelse med fusk omkring data i en ny bestseller »Klimabedrageriet«, der hævde at der ikke er nogen sammenhæng mellem temperaturstigninger og CO2-udledning.

Claude Allègre:

Alle graferne i bogen er gentegnede. Der er altså unøjagtigheder eller endda overdrivelser i forhold til originalerne. Det var et redaktionelt valg.

KILDE: Berlingske: Fransk klimaskeptiker grebet i fusk (4/4-10)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
Redigeret d. 08-04-2010 19:08
21-04-2010 09:47
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4609)
Richard Tol, har deltaget i IPCC´s arbejde siden omkring 1990 - der fortsat er tilhænger af global warming tanken - men altså er første hånds vidne fra IPCC udtaler:

Over the years, the IPCC has changed from a scientific institution that tries to be policy relevant to a political institution that pretends to be scientific. I regret that. There are already more than enough climate activists, while there are too few solid and neutral bodies that make down-to-earth and well-founded statements about climate change and climate policy.


og videre:

Working Groups 2 and 3 of the AR4 violated all IPCC procedures. The conclusions are partly scientifically unfounded, and even partly copied from the environmental movement. The AR4 was substantially changed after the final review, also in parts that had already been accepted by the referees. Valid comments were ignored.


og videre:

As a result, AR4 contains crude errors, only some of which are public knowledge. These errors can be found in the chapters, the technical summaries, the summaries for policy makers, and the synthesis report. The errors are not random.

Working Group 2 systematically portrays climate change as a bigger problem than is scientifically acceptable. Working Group 3 systematically portrays climate policy as easier and cheaper than can be responsibly concluded based on academic research.


http://nofrakkingconsensus.blogspot.com/2010/04/seasoned-veterans-view-of-ipcc.html
Redigeret d. 21-04-2010 09:48
21-04-2010 12:12
sg17a
★★☆☆☆
(375)
Sammenligning af Eyjafjallajoekull CO2 emission med den mængde CO2 som ikke bliver brugt pga reducering i flytrafikken.



link: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/planes-or-volcano/
22-04-2010 05:59
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
RE: Franks indlæg ovenfor af 21/4-10 HER.


REALCLIMATE: IPCC errors: facts and spin (14/2-10) Giver lidt baggrund til 'Climategate'.

Doubting basic results of climate science based on the recent claims against the IPCC is particularly ironic since none of the real or supposed errors being discussed are even in the Working Group 1 report, where the climate science basis is laid out.


Working Group 1 (WG1), which deals with the physical climate science basis, as assessed by the climatologists, including several of the Realclimate authors.

Working Group 2 (WG2), which deals with impacts of climate change on society and ecosystems, as assessed by social scientists, ecologists, etc.

Working Group 3 (WG3) , which deals with mitigation options for limiting global warming, as assessed by energy experts, economists, etc.

(AR4 = IPCC's 2007 rapport)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
22-04-2010 10:23
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
(AR4 = IPCC's 2007 rapport)

- jeg ser dog ingen forbindelse mellem Tols citerede påstande og RCs (forsøg på) afvisning heraf!(?)
22-04-2010 21:50
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4609)
Richard Tol, interview hos the Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/x-9111-Environmental-Policy-Examiner%7Ey2010m4d21-Global-warming-Examiner-exclusive-interview-with-Richard-Tol-IPCC-was-captured

Professor Tol: As the IPCC became more policy relevant over the years, it attracted more people with political rather than academic motives. Activists were few and from both sides in AR2. Some of the discussion in AR3 was very politicised, but in the end balance won. In AR4, however, green activists held key positions in the IPCC and they succeeded in excluding or neutralising opposite voices.


Men samme Tol er ivrig tilhænger af Carbon tax etc:
Professor Tol: Climate change is a problem that should be solved. We cannot let the planet get warmer and warmer. There should be a carbon tax, which should be modest at present but rise steadily and predictably over time.
22-04-2010 22:41
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
Et spørgsmål stilet til klimaministeriet ender op hos GEUS med følgende ordlyd:

Hvad er den ideelle gennemsnitstemperatur i en Mellemistid der efterhånden er 11.715 år gammel ?

Svaret er :

kære Svend Erik Hendriksen
dit spørgsmål er ad forskellige omveje landet hos mig. mit korte svar er 18 grader jeg er dog ikke helt sikker på, om jeg har forstået spørgsmålet
men gennemsnitstemperaturen på jorden under vores nuværende mellemistid er omkring 18 grader celcius

det er korrekt, at vi mener at temperaturen i Grønland under sidste mellemistids varmeste del var omkring 5 grader højere end i 1950'erne

skriv tilbage hvis jeg har svaret på noget forkert

med venlig hilsen
Ole
RE: Varmest muligt.22-04-2010 23:07
kulden-varmenProfilbillede★★★★★
(2086)
GLAR skrev:
Et spørgsmål stilet til klimaministeriet ender op hos GEUS med følgende ordlyd:

Hvad er den ideelle gennemsnitstemperatur i en Mellemistid der efterhånden er 11.715 år gammel ?


Det bedste er at det er så varmt som det kan blive. Da klimaet er mere stabilt når det er varmt, og har svære ved at skifte til istid.


24-04-2010 00:18
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4609)
Russisk forsker Oleg Pokrowski til Ria Novosti:

Nu drejer alle klimasystemets faktorer mod en negativ fase. Afkølingen vil toppe om 15 år. Politikerne har satses på en global opvarmning, men har satset på den forkerte hest.

NordØst Passagen vil kun kunne passeres med isbryder, og den formodede udnyttelse af Arktis vil støde på problemer.


http://de.rian.ru/science/20100423/126040500.html
Redigeret d. 24-04-2010 00:20
27-04-2010 17:42
kblood
★★★☆☆
(429)
" "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." – George Orwell, 1984


The idea of a medieval warm period was formulated for the first time in 1965 by the English climatologist Hubert H. Lamb [1]. Lamb, who founded the UK Climate Research Unit (CRU) in 1971, saw the peak of the warming period from 1000 to 1300, i.e. in the High Middle Ages. He estimated that temperatures then were 1-2 ° C above the normal period of 1931-1960. In the high North, it was even up to 4 degrees warmer. The regular voyages of the Vikings between Iceland and Greenland were rarely hindered by ice, and many burial places of the Vikings in Greenland still lie in the permafrost.

Glaciers were smaller than today


Begge er taget fra linket her.
21-05-2010 00:06
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
James Lovelock:

I remember when the Americans sent up a satellite to measure ozone and it started saying that a hole was developing over the South Pole. But the damn fool scientists were so mad on the models that they said the satellite must have a fault. We tend to now get carried away by our giant computer models. But they're not complete models. They're based more or less entirely on geophysics. They don't take into account the climate of the oceans to any great extent, or the responses of the living stuff on the planet. So I don't see how they can accurately predict the climate. It's not the computational power that we lack today, but the ability to take what we know and convert it into a form the computers will understand. I think we've got too high an opinion of ourselves. We're not that bright an animal. We stumble along very nicely and it's amazing what we do sometimes, but we tend to be too hubristic to notice the limitations. If you make a model, after a while you get suckered into it. You begin to forget that it's a model and think of it as the real world. You really start to believe it.

- læs mere her.
21-05-2010 21:54
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
James Lovelock:

Writing in the British newspaper The Independent in January 2006, Lovelock argues that, as a result of global warming, "billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable" by the end of the 21st century. He has been quoted in The Guardian that 80% of humans will perish by 2100 AD, and this climate change will last 100,000 years.

He further predicts, the average temperature in temperate regions will increase by as much as 8°C and by up to 5°C in the tropics, leaving much of the world's land uninhabitable and unsuitable for farming, with northerly migrations and new cities created in the Arctic. He predicts much of Europe will become uninhabitable having turned to desert and Britain will become Europe's "life-raft" due to its stable temperature caused by being surrounded by the ocean. He suggests that "we have to keep in mind the awesome pace of change and realise how little time is left to act, and then each community and nation must find the best use of the resources they have to sustain civilisation for as long as they can".

KILDE


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
RE: Klimaminister Lykke Friis støtter olien12-06-2010 22:32
bennohansenProfilbillede☆☆☆☆☆
(38)
"Det vigtigste er signalet om, at vi vil det her [støtte industrien i at udvinde al fossil brændstof fra Nordsøen]. For hvis industrien bliver lagt for had, så bliver det vanskeligt at tiltrække investeringer. Vi vil den her industri i høj grad ... Der er store indtjeningsmuligheder for Danmark, og det tror jeg godt, folk forstår. Det er godt for den danske økonomi, og godt at vi ikke bliver nødt til at importere fra lande, som ikke deler vores værdier ... Jeg forstår godt, hvis der er lidt forvirring, fordi der er så massiv fokus på, at vi skal omstille os. Jeg vil godt tage med mig hjem, at vi skal blive bedre til at forklare, at vi befinder os i en langvarig overgangsfase, hvor vi naturligvis skal fortsætte med at udnytte vores olie og gas."


Klimaminister Lykke Friis til konference i Danish Offshore Industry.


Læs min bog Ecowar - Natural Resources and Conflict!
16-06-2010 10:38
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Er det ny (varme, eller mon i virkeligheden på grund af kølige)vinde der blæser:


Pachauri, in a June 15, 2010 BBC commentary, declared:
"I am not deaf to those who do not agree with the scientific consensus on man-made climate change." Pachauri also added: "The IPCC and the scientific community at large should welcome the development of a vigorous debate on the science of climate change."

Det står jo i skarp kontrast til dette:

Pachauri pulled no punches on dissenters of the UN IPCC climate claims. Skeptics "are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder – I hope that they apply it to their faces every day...I'm totally in the clear. I have absolutely nothing but indifference to what these people are doing," Pachauri said in a February 3 2010 interview with the Financial Times.

Ovenstående er hentet fra:
Marc Morano – Climate Depot
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/6920/Say-What-After-Wishing-Skeptics-Would-Rub-Asbestos-on-their-Faces-UN-IPCCs-Pachauri-Now-Declares-he-is-not-deaf-to-skeptics-Says-IPCC-should-welcome-vigorous-debate


Det kunne jo have været fantastisk om de AGW fortalere bl.a Gavin Schmidt, James Hansen, Michael Mann, Phil Jones og William Schlesinger, der blev inviteret til Heartland konferencen 2010, havde sagt ja tak, og ikke var blevet hjemme, så det ikke blev en konference med kun skeptikere, der så kunne diskutere alt det, de i forvejen var mere eller mindre enige i – der var dog to AGW tilhængere (husker ikke hvem), der deltog, men som sagt ingen af de ovennævnte. – Så hvordan mon de nu vil forholde sig fremover, efter disse nye vinde blæser. Måske de har for travlt med at kridte mediebanen op...hvor AGW fronten jo mener, der er tabt et slag til skeptikerne...så det hele er altså nu endt som et rent pr stunt? (suk)


Noget er der jo ved at ske rundt omkring - også her på klimadebat, som f.eks @bennohansen, der med et savner noget modspil fra de, han modigt stadigvæk kalder for "klimabenægtere"

Hvem gider mere???

Jeg har (tavst) fulgt med her et stykke tid nu, og ikke set meget "klimadebat" selv om der har været nok, man kunne henvise til og kommentere på, fra "skeptikerside" (inklusive mig selv), men har mere set debat om tekniske løsninger på forsyningsmuligheder, hvilket i øvrigt er alle tiders og godt at nogle går i dybden med.


Får heller ikke så meget tid til her i sommer at kommentere på ret meget, men læser ivrigt diverse blogs rundt omkring og er som jeg altid har været, især interesseret i mediernes håndtering af det hele.

...
Redigeret d. 16-06-2010 11:37
16-06-2010 22:13
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
NCDC: State of the Climate Global Analysis May 2010

The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for May 2010 was 0.69°C above the 20th century average.....This is the warmest such value on record since 1880.

The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January–May 2010 was the warmest on record.



Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
18-06-2010 09:01
Morten Riber
★★★★☆
(1804)
Hej ISIS

Noget er der jo ved at ske rundt omkring - også her på klimadebat, som f.eks @bennohansen, der med et savner noget modspil fra de, han modigt stadigvæk kalder for "klimabenægtere"

Hvem gider mere???


Tja, du kommer selv med svaret. Når en debattør på forhånd signalerer at han nægter at føre en ligeværdig dialog, mister han i min respekt og interesse. Samtidig står det klart at skeptikernes argumenter er formuleret og fremført med alt tydelighed, og virker stille og roligt ind på den offentlige debat som modgift mod et slangebid. Tilbage er kun at vente på og håbe at patienten kommer sig, hvilket alt jo tyder på.

Mvh og god sommer
Morten
19-06-2010 08:42
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Roger Harrabin skriver i New Scientist:

These [climate] sceptics claim they already enjoy quiet support from many academics scared to speak out for fear of losing tenure. Groupthink, they insist, has taken over. Is this so?

A few months ago, I put out feelers on three sceptic websites asking for sceptical scientists at British universities to contact me anonymously. I could count the positive replies on one hand with a few missing fingers.

Meanwhile, alarm among many scientists over the risks of climate change appears as strong as ever - if not stronger.

Kilde: Take the political heat out of climate scepticism


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
19-06-2010 10:51
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
Meanwhile, alarm among many scientists over the risks of climate change appears as strong as ever - if not stronger

- and yet:

The British Royal Society recently released a statement that "Any public perception that the science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect," thus contradicting its own former president, and true believer, Lord May. And if the science isn't settled, there can hardly ever have been "consensus" on the issue.

A forthcoming paper by Mike Hulme, Professor of Climate Change at the University of East Anglia, from which the Climategate emails emerged, admits that the actual group involved in the "consensus" that "human activities are having a significant influence on the climate" was in fact "only a few dozen," rather than the thousands invoked by the IPCC.

Last week, economist Richard Tol, one of the IPCC's own lead authors, suggested that the whole IPCC process should be suspended until the selection of authors has been fixed. This week, the ­IPCC's head, Rajendra Pachauri, who has previously accused skeptics of flat Earthism and "voodoo science," suddenly had a Damascene conversion as to the validity of dissent. "I am not deaf," he wrote, "to those who do not agree with the scientific consensus on man-made climate change. Nor, indeed, to those who do not agree with the findings — or, in some cases, the existence — of the IPCC."
Kilde
06-07-2010 09:27
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Aller først, tak til Morten Riber for den venlige sommerhilsen. I lige måde her fra...


Jeg ved godt, at der måske er nogle, der ikke læser engelsk så særligt godt, men jeg har ikke tid til at oversætte. Her er udpluk, og man kan kopiere teksten og så indsætte den i googleoversætter fra engelsk til dansk, og få en lidt bedre -om end måske ikke perfekt fattelig- forståelse...

"-But greater openness and engagement with their critics will not ensure that climate scientists have an easier time in future, warns Hulme. Back in the lab, a new generation of more sophisticated computer models is failing to reduce the uncertainties in predicting future climate, he says – rather, the reverse. "This is not what the public and politicians expect, so handling and explaining this will be difficult."

Hele artiklen er her:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/04/climatechange-hacked-emails-muir-russell

Watts (wattsupwiththat) der henviser til ovenstående artikel skriver bl.a.:

"This endorsement of the Climategate effect comes from a most unlikely source, The Guardian's Fred Pearce, who also writes for The New Scientist. Most telling about all of the investigations so far is that they have not interviewed any of the primary investigators that question the methods and data, such as Steve McIntyre."

Resten af kommentarerne fra Watts er her:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/05/the-guardian-climategate-was-a-game-changer/


Af andre interessante ting, der sker for tiden, er ny kinesisk forskning om temperaturer gennem de sidste 2000 år i Kina, tilsyneladenne ikke har "eliminieret" middelaldervarmen (som bl.a. den berømte/ berygtede Mann. der atter gennem noget, der ligner hvidvask - ligesom når politi eller sygehusvæsen undersøger sig selv - igen og igen frikendes for "det hele" på nær det videnskabelige, der hverken er vurderet eller ikke vurderet, fordi ingen endnu er gået rigtigt ind i det, i disse climategate sager) men derimod viser, der har været perioder gennem tiden der har været mindst ligeså varme, som den tid vi nu lever i (tænk sig, hvilken en overraskelse...
)

Der kan læses om det her:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/04/new-chinese-study-in-grl-disputes-the-hockey-stick-conclusions/


Så det er jo dejligt nok, alt dette, i disse sære tider, hvor IPPC formanden, på den ene side siger, at han nu (langt om længe) lytter åbent til "skeptikere", mens andre samtidig har oprettet noget, de fleste kalder en "blacklist", så man nemt kan finde ud af hvem, der er for eller imod IPCC. Denne liste kritiseres også af nogle af de, der på listen optræder som værende "for" - her bl.a. Peter Webster, klimatolog ved Georgia Tech:

"I do require one clarification and perhaps you can help. Which is the black list: those who agree with the IPCC as defined by PNAS, or the skeptics? By the PNAS classification, I ended up as a supporter of the IPCC, since I signed the Bali 2007 document. I am trying to remember why I did so. That was 3 years ago and I had not thought too much about IPCC and etc. and it was before the latest assessment. Since then I have become more involved with climate change research and more critical of process and perhaps more questioning of the attribution of warming simply because the IPCC performed poorly in distinguishing between natural variability and anthropogenic effects or hardly considered the issue at all."

Hele hans kommentar er her:
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/06/peter-webster-on-pnas-paper-very-likely.html


Der har selvfølgelig været masser af omtale om dette på de forskellige blogs rundt om på nettet, bl.a hos Watts:

"Apparently, some believe they can communicate better with the public not by demonizing carbon but by demonizing those who challenge their views, by attempting to demonstrate the challengers are somehow unqualified. The keyword "climate deniers" is a tip-off – those who think that based on physical evidence, climate change is largely natural, not human caused. Already, blacklists have been drawn up with names of those who challenge the orthodoxy. Sometime in the future, it may be useful to compare the allocation of funding with names on the lists to assess the objectivity of those who control climate change funding."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/27/sepp-on-the-pnas-blacklist-paper/


Det var så lidt opsamling af noget af alt det, der er sket/sker, og som jo selvfølgelig ikke omtales i de danske medier, jeg har set, og der er meget mere, men jeg går ud fra, at de fleste af jer selv læser rundt omkring. Jeg føler dog trang til at fremhæve noget af det , ind i mellem!

.....
07-07-2010 11:53
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
Det var så lidt opsamling af noget af alt det, der er sket/sker, og som jo selvfølgelig ikke omtales i de danske medier, jeg har set, og der er meget mere, men...

- spændende, hvor megen omtale dét her:

FN's klimapanel var ensidigt negativ og dramatiserede konsekvenserne af klimaforandringerne op til klimatopmødet i København i december 2009. Det fastslår stor undersøgelse, iværksat af den hollandske regering

får?
07-07-2010 12:10
branner
AdministratorProfilbillede★★★☆☆
(731)
Kosmos skrev:
- spændende, hvor megen omtale dét her:
FN's klimapanel var ensidigt negativ og dramatiserede konsekvenserne af klimaforandringerne op til klimatopmødet i København i december 2009. Det fastslår stor undersøgelse, iværksat af den hollandske regering

får?

Utroligt som selvsamme hollandske undersøgelse kan vinkles forskelligt. Her Jørgen Steen Nielsen i Information under overskriften FN's klimapanel frikendt for anklager om fusk:

»IPCC-rapporten har på afgørende vis dokumenteret, at disse konsekvenser allerede er synlige mange steder på kloden, og at de vil blive yderligere alvorlige ved fortsatte temperaturstigninger,« hedder det i rapporten, der dermed tilbageviser anklager fra klimaskeptikere og flere medier i tiden efter klimatopmødet i København om manipulation og manglende troværdighed i klimapanelet.
07-07-2010 12:28
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
Utroligt som selvsamme hollandske undersøgelse kan vinkles forskelligt. Her Jørgen Steen Nielsen i Information...

- enig, og dét fanger også kommentator Ipsen:

Kan man få et link til den Hollandske rapport - Berlingeren fremhæver helt andre vinkler end JSN på hovedkonklusionerne:...
12-07-2010 13:14
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Ja, undskyld jeg ikke har reageret på indlæg, men min pc brød ganske og aldeles sammen, og jeg har først nu fået anskaffet erstatning...


Måske er det sådan, at grunden til både Politiken og JP ikke (så vidt jeg kan se – men kunne ikke komme på nettet lige netop de dage, hvor alt dette skete) hverken skriver om den hollandske rapport eller den sidste "The Muir Russell Review", (der endnu engang erklærer, at næsten alt var som det skulle være - hvilket jo (igen, igen, igen) ikke kommer som nogen overraskelse for skeptikere, når man ser på disse panelers sammensætning og hvem der "afhøres") fordi, det er blevet for kompliceret, især hvis man som avis ikke har opdateret løbende om hvem, hvad, hvorfor og hvordan - hvor det jo kun er Information der har været på - nogenlunde, om end overfladisk og bestemt kun sporadisk på banen (den ene banehalvdel, da de efter min mening, er totalt ensidige, men det kan jo forklares med, at de tidligere i DR2 program, offentligt har erklæret deres fulde støtte til ideerne om AGW og endda, så vidt jeg husker, udtalt at synspunkter der afviger herfra, ikke burde bringes i medierne overhovedet – så deres dækning kommer ikke bag på mig).
Det overraskende denne gang er Berlingeren, der ellers har været præget af en temmelig stor tiltro til "the establishment" - især op til klimatopmødet og derfor bragte den ene katastrofeartikel efter den anden. Det var Hans Henrik (resten af navnet husker jeg ikke - var det noget med Ågård).
Og ellers er de danske medier i sommervarmen søvnigt tilstede, med den sædvanlige slags historier om dræbergobler og temperaturerne om halvtreds år, spået af DMI og årets varmerekorder og varmen rundt omkring i verden, men ikke et ord, om kulderekorder andre steder osv. osv. Modsat når der er kulde i landet, så skal det jo lige nævnes, at der er udsædvanligt varmt rundt omkring andre steder.

Jeg vender nok tilbage med mere om den sidste Muir Russell rapport og reaktionerne, som bestemt ikke er uinteressante.
Indtil videre kan man jo læse Roger Pielke jr. (som jeg har umådelig respekt for, fordi han støtter op om AGW, men samtidig er kritisk overfor IPPC og fordi han gider og tillader kommentarer og indlæg med forskellige holdninger på sin blog – og der er en vidunderlig -i nysprog kaldet - "god tone" fra ham, og fra de, der sender indlæg eller kommentarer)

Nå, det var en mindre afledning, men her er hvad Pielke jr. bl.a. har af kommentarer: http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/07/muir-russel-review.html

-og som kosmos henviser til andet steds her på klimadebat (hackede CRU-mails); artikel om Graham Stringer's reaktioner og mening om, at denne undersøgelse langt fra er ok, og burde tages op igen

...Stringer stiller bl.a. følgende spørgsmål:

"Why did they delete emails? The key question was what reason they had for doing this, but this was never addressed; not getting to the central motivation was a major failing both of our report and Muir Russell."

Stringer also says that it was unacceptable for Russell (who is not a scientist) to conclude that CRU's work was reproducible, when the data needed was not available.

He goes further:

"The fact that you can make up your own experiments and get similar results doesn't mean that you're doing what's scientifically expected of you. You need to follow the same methodology of the process."

"I was surprised at Phil Jones' answers to the questions I asked him [in Parliament]. The work was never replicable," says Stringer.

In 2004 Jones had declined to give out data that would have permitted independent scrutiny of their work, explaining that "We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it."

Videre:

"This policy is confirmed several times in the emails, with Jones also advising colleagues to destroy evidence helpful to people wishing to reproduce the team's results.

"I think that's quite shocking," says Stringer.

Thirdly, the University of East Anglia failed to follow the Commons Select Committee's recommendations in handling the inquiry and producing the report.

Stringer said, "We asked them to be independent, and not allow the University to have first sight of the report. The way it's come out is as an UEA inquiry, not an independent inquiry."

Stringer also says they reminded the inquiry to be open – Russell had promised as much – but witness testimony took place behind closed doors, and not all the depositions have been published.

Muir Russell's team heard only one side of the story, failing to call witnesses who were the subjects of the emails – Stephen McIntyre of Climate Audit is mentioned over one hundred times in the archive – who may have given a different perspective. Nor was any active climate scientist supportive of climate change policy but critical of the CRU team's behaviour – Hans Storch or Judith Curry, let alone the prominent sceptics, for example – summoned. Stringer feels their presence would have provided vital context.

The panel included Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet and a vocal advocate of mitigation against climate change (in 2007 he described [3] global warming "the biggest threat to our future health") and Geoffrey Boulton a climate change advisor to the UK government and the EU, who spent 16-years at the University of East Anglia [4] – the institution under apparently 'independent' scrutiny.

In several areas the CRU academics were given the benefit of the doubt because a precedent had been set – often by the academics themselves."

Hvordan dette kan kaldes en sejr for nogen som helst, er for mig uforståeligt. Men sådan er der så meget...


Undskyld den måske lidt "rodede" opsætning, men jeg er på en meget langsom forbindelse, da jeg befinder mig midt i en skov....og har det med helt at ryge af ind i mellem...


....




....
12-07-2010 14:52
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
Det var Hans Henrik (resten af navnet husker jeg ikke - var det noget med Ågård)

- du tænker nok på Lars Henrik Aagaard, avisens 'videnskabsreporter' - der iøvrigt efterfølgende har virket særdeles fraværende fra 'blogs.berlingske.dk'!
12-07-2010 14:59
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
tak for det kosmos
- jo, Lars Henrik Aagaard, var det.
12-07-2010 16:48
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3989)
jo, Lars Henrik Aagaard, var det

- og jeg har lige tjekket hans blogindsats i 2010, hvor han har behandlet jordeskælvet på Haïti, 'isvinteren', 'asken' (to gange) og senest landsholdets manglende(?) 'højdetræning' før VM; det ser dog ikke ud til, han har væsentligt mere 'medvind på cykelstien' som fx. sportsjournalist!

Redigeret d. 12-07-2010 16:52
14-07-2010 09:27
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"For example, one of the mostfeared effects of warming is rising sea levels—yet mankind has successfully dealt with similar rises for centuries. "As soon as you start talking to Dutch engineers, you realize that sea-level rise is business as usual," says Geden"

Interessant artikel fra Newsweek beskriver ny klimarealisme, dog stadigvæk ud fra ideen om, når det bliver varmere og ikke hvis. Men lige meget hvad, er det da gode nyheder, at man, hvis det bliver varmere bruger lidt sund fornuft, i stedet for at foretage sig alt muligt med CO2 reduktioner, måske til ingen verdens nytte!


Artiklen kan læses her:
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/12/a-green-retreat.html

....
27-07-2010 09:43
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"Global warming is strictly an imaginary problem of the First World middleclass,"

Left-wing Env. Scientist Bails Out Of Global Warming Movement: Declares 'corrupt social phenomenon"

Physicist Dr. Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, has officially bailed out of the man-made global warming movement.

Link: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate
....
13-08-2010 12:24
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4609)
ANDY REVKIN - skribent bl.a på NY TIMES bestemt kendt for at være pro-global warming fløjen - skriver nu pludseligt:

"greenhouse-driven change, given the uncertainties, is -- at best -- a tertiary wild card."




http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/12/building-resilience-on-a-turbulent-planet/
Redigeret d. 13-08-2010 12:25
17-08-2010 21:21
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
For dem som samler på koldt vejr historier og behøver det skåret ud i pap, citat her:

High temperatures beat lows - Gerald Meehl (National Center for Atmospheric Research) on Current & Future Climate (10/11-09)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
19-08-2010 15:49
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Rick_uk skriver:

For dem som samler på koldt vejr historier og behøver det skåret ud i pap, citat her:


Da jeg godt kan lide at læse og følge med her på klimadebat (inden for det
overkommerlige), ku jeg godt tænke mig at få budskabet/citatet
nedfældet i ord, og ikke "skåret ud i pap", da jeg dels er udenfor pædagoisk rækkevidde, hvis nogen prøver at belære mig via udskårne papstykker og dels ikke er i stand til at se tv-indslag/videoer på nettet på grund af min nuværende internetforbindelse...tak


....
19-08-2010 15:53
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Citat fra JoNova:

"Thousands of scientists have been funded to find a connection between human carbon emissions and the climate. Hardly any have been funded to find the opposite. Throw 30 billion dollars at one question and how could bright, dedicated people not find 800 pages worth of connections, links, predictions, projections and scenarios? (What's amazing is what they haven't found: empirical evidence.)"


Den sørgelige læsning her:
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/climate-money/

Ovenstående artikel linkes der til fra denne artikel:
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/08/i-was-once-a-green-who-believed-in-man-made-global-warming/#more-9919

....
23-08-2010 08:28
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
In summary, the total amount of post-industrial fossil fuel burned to date (and expressed as kilograms of carbon) represents less than 1% of the global bio-available carbon pools.


Skriver Denis Rancourt

Videre skriver han:
More importantly, scientists know virtually nothing about the dynamic carbon exchange fluxes that occur on all the relevant time and lengths scales to say anything definitive about how atmospheric CO2 arises and is exchanged in interaction with the planet's ecological systems. We are barely at the point of being able to ask intelligent questions.


Og videre:
As with most areas of science and medicine, however, despite our gargantuan ignorance we are unfortunately able to sound knowledgeable and able to write impressive grant proposals and governmental reports. It's a dangerous place to be for society when you have a demonstrated bad habit of serving powerful economic interests. Common sense and independent thinking are going to have to prevail if we do not want to continue with this circus.


Meget læseværdig artikel (Også selvom man ikke i øvrigt måtte være politisk enig med ham!) af Denis Rancourt som tidligere er blevet referet til som:

Physicist Dr. Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, has officially bailed out of the man-made global warming movement.

Ser ud til at fortsætte med at skrive om emnet

http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2010/08/is-burning-of-fossil-fuel-significant.html

......
Side 9 af 13<<<7891011>>>





Deltag aktivt i debatten Bemærkelsesværdige citater.....:

Husk mig

▲ Til toppen
Afstemning
Vil Donald Trump trække USA ud af Paris-aftalen?

Ja

Nej

Ved ikke


Tak for støtten til driften af Klimadebat.dk.
Copyright © 2007-2016 Klimadebat.dk | Kontakt | Privatlivspolitik