A Really Inconvenient Truth!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091230184221.htm

A really inconvenient truth, for If the climate gate scandal wasn't enough to put and end to the AGW cap and trade nonsense then this new data ought to. This study proves the AGW alarmists computer models are based on false assumptions.

According to the IPCC, this "atmospheric fraction" of CO2 is increasing, and is destined to increase even more, because the processes which have been removing over half of human-emitted CO2 will be unable to continue to do so. But, according to this study, those models are wrong. The rate of increase is unlikely to be nearly as high as the IPCC modelers predicted, and the consequences are well... inconsequential.

Lord Monckton has a good article, here:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/temperature_and_co2_change_briefin...
---------------------------------------------
The abstract from the scientific journal is here: http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009GL040613.shtml

The conclusion: "The analysis further shows that the statistical model of a constant airborne fraction agrees best with the available data if emissions from land use change are scaled down to 82% or less of their original estimates. Despite the predictions of coupled climate-carbon cycle models, no trend in the airborne fraction can be found."
---------------------------------------------

Maybe Al Gore and Rajendra Pachauri, should return that Nobel prize? Oh (bama) that's right! you don't have to actually accomplish anything worthwhile to humanity to get one of those anymore!

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Global Warming
• Anthropogenic Global warming
• AGW
• Climate change
• Al Gore
• Rajendra Pachauri
• Copenhagen
• Scandal
• Hoax
• Pseudoscience
• Fear Monger

[kapwns]

"Lord" Monckton is a dishonest denialist and its no wonder why, considering the evidence for AGW is so overwhelming, one would have to be dishonest or willfully ignorant, to still be in denial.

[TheSmackerlacker]

@phantomscolts2 I wouldn't know about that. I survive solely on the benefits of a government established to serve the interests of those who ignorance and bigotry has disabled me.

I hope the irony of this is not lost on you.

I guess what I'm saying is that neither of us is speaking from a position of knowledge, but one of speculation, with the same goal in mind.

So I will say this. If you can detach yourself from the concerns of life, and view them from the outside, they become somewhat amusing.

[TheSmackerlacker]

@phantomscolts2 Science has given us cars, television, electricity, clean drinking water, indoor plumbing, computers, vaccines for many diseases, cures for many others, shampoo, glasses to help us see, the ability to survive in the vacuum of space, the ability to breathe underwater, RADAR, artificial satellites, GPS, plastic, oh, and the fact that you'll live to see your 35th birthday.

Say thank you to science. Science is the reason that you don't spend 12 hours a day working just to stay alive.

[TheSmackerlacker]

@phantomscolts2 It's clear that you know nothing of science, or what the word "theory" means. You see, a scientist has to be a rational person. To be rational is to admit that you can't possibly know everything. Therefore, you cannot reasonably dismiss any possibility, even if the evidence seems to indicate otherwise.

Thus, in the strictest sense, everything science holds to be true is still a theory, even gravity.

Science has given you everything you have. Don't be so quick to dismiss it.

[TheSmackerlacker]

@phantomscolts2 Climate change is not a political construct. Climate change is a matter of consensus in the scientific community. The last hold-outs were the association of petroleum geologists (I wonder why?).

Politicians and the news media can debate it all they want, but among scientists (the only people qualified to say anything on the matter), the debates are over.

Climate change is happening, and human activity clearly has an effect.

[TheSmackerlacker]

@phantomscolts2 So what you're saying is that by hurting big business and encouraging investment into EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE alternative sources of energy, as well as curtailing their cheap, polluting practices, somehow... big business is earning huge profits?

That's weird, because I thought that big business was really helping itself by saying "Nooooo, oil is fine. Really.".

I wonder how I got that all twisted around? Gosh, I must be a fucking idiot.

[AngeCord]

I love how oil industry PR can twist scientific data. According to Wolfgang Knorrs research, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade. How does that turn to 'has not increased'?

Dr Knorr also states in an interview: 'Half the CO2 we emit stays in the atmosphere and that's enough to cause global warming.'

[AdviserMoppet]

@cdputnam You can pretty much say that about every religious leader in the world too.

[TAPriceCTR]

here is an idea, exponential power bills. if you use double the average, your rate is doubled as well. al gore spends 20 times average so multiply his rate by 20 as well.... lets see if he can stand behind him paying $24,000 per month in power and the multiplier is based on all his homes consumption combined.

[TAPriceCTR]

@lonewolf1264

were it so simple... they want to do more than make another tax... they want to build an entirely new economy to add on to the current 2 (goods & services for cash, and the stock market) atleast the stock market started out as a valid concept, this carbon economy does NOTHING but move money into hte hands of elites.