Masseudryddelse og menneskets undergang

Guy McPherson er professor og klimaekspert...

Analysis of the data by knowledgeable science educators such as Scott K. Johnson[3] and working scientists such as Michael Tobis[4] shows that McPherson wildly distorts climate science -- especially developments about methane emissions from the Arctic -- to support his conclusions. They also refute his claims related to runaway climate "feedbacks" as, variously, "not fast enough", not meeting the technical description of positive feedbacks, or actually constituting negative feedbacks. Additionally, Tobis points out that some of McPherson's statements -- such as his nonsensical predictions regarding chain nuclear meltdowns -- have literally nothing to do with climate science...

Lever vi en boble, hvor vi ikke ser det?

...en løbsk drivhuseffekt, hvis methanen begynder at slippe ud i store mængder

...shows that McPherson wildly distorts climate science -- especially developments about methane emissions from the Arctic -- to support his conclusions

Zeus skrev:
Pointen er ikke den nuværende temperaturstigning, men en løbsk drivhuseffekt, hvis methanen begynder at slippe ud i store mængder. Han mener menneskeheden kan være uddød allerede omkring 2030-40.

Peter Mogensen skrev:

Zeus skrev:
Pointen er ikke den nuværende temperaturstigning, men en løbsk drivhuseffekt, hvis methanen begynder at slippe ud i store mængder. Han mener menneskeheden kan være uddød allerede omkring 2030-40.

De effekter han snakker om er en reel risiko på længere sigt, - hvis vi fortsætter med at øge atmosfærens CO2 indhold.

Men han står ret alene med sin vurdering af at det vil ske lige om lidt. - faktisk så meget alene at det nok ikke er for meget at sige at han forvansker klimaforskningen ca. ligeså meget som de her selv-erklærede "skeptikere" - blot til den anden side.

Hvad det var, der var årsagen til dette gigantiske tøbrud, har været genstand for megen diskussion, men opdagelsen af et stort indhold af den særlige carbon-12 isotop i bjergarter i det sydlige Kina, bjergarter som blev dannet i denne periode for 600 millioner år siden, tyder på, at det var enorme udslip af metangas, der var årsagen. Metan er en af de mest virksomme drivhusgasser.

men opdagelsen af et stort indhold af den særlige carbon-12 isotop i bjergarter i det sydlige Kina

Han mener at mindst 90% af menneskeheden vil uddø inden 2100 pga. klima. Det har han sagt i lang tid og han er kun blevet mere pessimistisk med årene

In an April 2012 interview, aired on MSNBC, Lovelock stated that he had been "alarmist", using the words "All right, I made a mistake," about the timing of climate change and noted the documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the book The Weather Makers as examples of the same kind of alarmism. Lovelock still believes the climate to be warming although the rate of change is not as he once thought, he admitted that he had been "extrapolating too far." He believes that climate change is still happening, but it will be felt farther in the future.[28] Of the claims "the science is settled" on global warming he states:[39]
"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don't know it."[39]
He criticizes environmentalists for treating global warming like a religion.[39]
"It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion," Lovelock observed
"I don't think people have noticed that, but it's got all the sort of terms that religions use ... The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can't win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air."[39]
In the MSNBC article Lovelock is quoted as proclaiming:[28]
"The problem is we don't know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn't happened;" he continues
"The climate is doing its usual tricks. There's nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now," he said
The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time ... it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising - carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that", he added.[28]
In a follow up interview Lovelock stated his support for natural gas; he now favors fracking as a low-polluting alternative to coal.[18][39] He opposes the concept of "sustainable development", where modern economies might be powered by wind turbines, calling it meaningless drivel.[39][40] He keeps a poster of a wind turbine to remind himself how much he detests them.[18]