Birth of a Climate Crock

To help support Climate Denial Crock of the Week
Go to
http://climatecrocks.com/


The observation that natural climate variability exists is not a new one.
Early in September 2009, at a gathering of experts on global climate change, one of the world's most respected and experienced climate modelers, Mojib Latif, made some observations on climate, media and human nature.

The message seemed clear.
natural variations in the long term warming might be misinterpreted,
by the media. out of ignorance, or malice.

Climate deniers were quick to take Latif's remarks, and begin
doing exactly that.

You can listen to Latif's original remarks, here, by clicking on the
recording titled "Advancing climate prediction science".
http://www.wmo.int/wcc3/rec_audios_en.html

the original powerpoint is here:
http://www.wmo.int/wcc3/sessionsdb/documents/PS3_Latif.pdf

An analysis is here:
http://deepclimate.org/2009/10/02/anatomy-of-a-lie-how-morano-and-gunter-spun...
http://deepclimate.org/2009/10/02/key-excerpts-from-mojib-latifs-wcc-presenta...

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Climate change
• climate
• global warming
• CO2
• carbon dioxide
• Al Gore
• Anthony Watts
• mojib latif
• banned video
• Peter Sinclair
• greenman3610
• dmca
• banned
• censorship
• world climate conference
• Crock
• Denial
• Denier
• Climate Denier
• Climate Denial
• green
• earth
• environment
• atmosphere
• smoking
• tobacco
• 32000
• scientists
• petition
• climate petition
• IPCC
• climate science
• ozone
• ozone layer
• ice
• arctic ice
• polar
• arctic ocean
• ocean acidification
• Heartland institute

[Herecomesthefatlady]

Wonderful work Greenman. Thank you.

[greenman3610]

@Herecomesthefatlady

you're welcome.

plenty more to come.

[harp1925]

Latest news on NOVA-Dinosaurs thrived in Alaska, even though it was closer to the north pole than today. 70 million years ago the average temperature in alaska was 40 degrees warmer than today, clearly indicating a cooling trend in the bigger picture-millions of years trump 120 years all day long. Another nail in the g.w. myth coffin. Have a nice day. R.I.P. G.W. 2011!

[greenman3610]

@harp1925

need for a history lesson.

never fear:

watch?v=uE6at2IEUOU

watch?v=ZGFAWzjO378

[facelessone86]

This just in:

Real science is determined by what doesn't make david222444 laugh. Who needs peer-review when you have a system like that?

[david222444]

@Herecomesthefatlady You are a parrot! why don't you do some thinking for yourself? and stop letting others do the thinking for you. I take back the scientific. Pure shite will do for some of these excuses for papers.

[Herecomesthefatlady]

david222444

I'll only stop referencing scientific papers when you stop typing on a computer that came about as a result of "scientific shite".

[david222444]

@Herecomesthefatlady No research gravy train mentioned , just honest science. We are dealing with the climate system and not a living organic being, therefore there is no comparison and to me a frace gas is a trace gas. It cannot be the primary driver of our climate, please don't make me laugh. Will you stop parroting scientific shite!

[Herecomesthefatlady]

david222444

Not a single peer-reviewed paper to back up your opinion.

Opinion is not science.

By the way, "Observational and model evidence for positive low-level cloud feedback, AC Clement, R Burgman, 2011" and several other papers show that clouds have a net positive feedback on warming.

Also by the way, a trace of something can be very potent. Try a glass of water with a trace of strychnine in if you don't think so.

[david222444]

@Herecomesthefatlady Oh I am blinded with science NOT . Anyone with a little common sense will realise that clouds provide a negative feedback to the system. No pal review required. Please to back and reponder the insignificant effects of the minor trace gas (co2). I really get the feeling that I am dealing with a bunch of lunatics. Have you any idea of the magnitude of the other forces driving the climate? The trace gas is so insignificant that it is not even worth a mention.

[Herecomesthefatlady]

david222444

Please present a link to a recent peer reviewed paper that shows negative feedback effects in climate change.

There are plenty that show positive feedback.

Try Vostok ice core provides 160,000-year record of atmospheric CO2; JM Barnola, D Raynaud, YS Korotkevich" 2011

or

Positive feedback between global warming and atmospheric CO2 concentration inferred from past climate change; M Scheffer, V Brovkin - Geophysical Research Letters, 2006

[greenman3610]

@8thRRFS

the problem for you is, we can observe those orbital dynamics, and we know they are not responsible for current warming. see

watch?v=L2m9SNzxJJA

[david222444]

@facelessone86 More rubbish spouted from a dim wit. Try looking up negative feedback and try to understand what that means to the climate system. Your positive feedback loop in a chaotic climate system is utter nonsense. When do we burn up then? LOL