Investment and other financial matters

Re: Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof

"Cwatters" <colin.wattersNOS…@TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote in
message news:4_WdnT8_NrVHjmPVnZ2dnUVZ8oWdnZ2d@posted.plusnet…

> The world can afford to do something about GW. Can we afford the risk
> of not doing anything?

Definitely!
We can afford to ignore non-existent GW!

Manhattan Declaration On Climate Change

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/23…

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields,
economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times
Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International
Conference on Climate Change,

Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the
scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will,
independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is
not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

Recognising that the causes and extent of recently-observed climatic
change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science
community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’
among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations
on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction
will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future
trajectory of global climate change.  Such policies will markedly
diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to
adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing
human suffering;

Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth
than colder:

Hereby declare:

That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a
dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that
should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.

That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern
industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause
catastrophic climate change.

That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on
industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of
CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of
developing nations without affecting climate.

That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any
attempted mitigation, and that a focus on such mitigation will divert
the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real
problems of their peoples.

That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.

Now, therefore, we recommend –

That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but
misguided works such as "An Inconvenient Truth".

That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce
emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008

400 Scientists Protest: What terrible man-made global warming?

December 21 2007

The consensus grows – man-made global warming is largely hot air:

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries
recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called
"consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom
are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN
IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the
scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of
the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington
Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that
climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking."

It’s becoming easier to find dissenting scientists than scientists who
are true believers. Unless, of course, you read only The Age and listen
only to the ABC.

The names and the views of these dissenting scientists here.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

Get The TRUE Facts At
 http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html

Excellent Links At
 http://www.warwickhughes.com/

"…and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen

.
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comment (1)

One Response to “Re: Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof”

  1. admin says:

    "kT" <cos…@lifeform.org> wrote in message

    news:0SrLk.2023$I8.788@newsfe03.iad…

    > Androcles wrote:

    >> Since we can’t even forecast the weather for more than a couple of
    >> days
    >> how in the hell do you imagine we can forecast climate for years to
    >> come?

    > Just offhand because weather is not climate?

    The models can’t even prdict climate my son!!

    The Sorry History Of Climate Model Predictions

    16 Sep 2008

    "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and
    expecting realistic results."

    The computer models upon which the UN’s climate panel unwisely founds
    its entire case have failed and failed and failed again to predict major
    events in the real climate.

    a. The models have not projected the current multidecadal stasis in
    "global warming":

    b. no rise in temperatures since 1998; falling temperatures since late
    2001; temperatures not expected to set a new record until 2015
    (Keenlyside et al., 2008).

    c. nor (until trained ex post facto) did they predict the fall in TS
    from 1940-1975;

    d. nor 50 years’ cooling in Antarctica (Doran et al., 2002) and the
    Arctic (Soon, 2005);

    e. nor the absence of ocean warming since 2003 (Lyman et al., 2006;
    Gouretski & Koltermann, 2007);

    f. nor the behavior of the great ocean oscillations (Lindzen, 2007),

    g. nor the magnitude nor duration of multi-century events such as the
    Mediaeval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age;

    h. nor the decline since 2000 in atmospheric methane concentration
    (IPCC, 2007);

    i. nor the active 2004 hurricane season;

    j. nor the inactive subsequent seasons;

    k. nor the UK flooding of 2007 (the Met Office had forecast a summer of
    prolonged droughts only six weeks previously);

    l. nor the solar Grand Maximum of the past 70 years, during which the
    Sun was more active, for longer, than at almost any similar period in
    the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004; Solanki et al., 2005);

    m. nor the consequent surface "global warming" on Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s
    largest moon, and even distant Pluto;

    n. nor the eerily-continuing 2006 solar minimum;

    o. nor the consequent, precipitate decline of ~0.8 °C in surface
    temperature from January 2007 to May 2008 that has canceled out almost
    all of the observed warming of the 20th century.

    http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=1803

    Warmest Regards

    Bonzo

    : "They don’t tell you, that, in their computer models, it’s assumed
    that CO2 drives global warming. In other words, you assume the result
    and say the computer model proves we were right. It’s garbage in,
    garbage out. If you don’t program the computers to cause temperatures to
    rise with CO2, then you have nothing." Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor
    Emeritus Geology, Western Washington University