And this is just one of the issues challenging the credibility of the IPCC’s (and supporting organizations and “scientists”), theories and assertions. A castle built on sand.
Related articles
- Online Spiegel Top Headline: “Contradictory Prognoses: Scientists Discover Discrepancies In UN Climate Report” (notrickszone.com)
- MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Rips UN IPCC Report: ‘The latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence’ – ‘It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate ag (climatedepot.com)
- 46 statements by IPCC experts against the IPCC (grumpydenier.wordpress.com)
- Swiss News Weekly Delivers Massive Blow To IPCC: “Fortune Tellers, Not Scientists” … “Skeptics On The Rise” (notrickszone.com)
- UN Climate Report Goes Bust (canadafreepress.com)
- Scafetta 2013: Simple solar astronomical model beats IPCC climate models (climatedepot.com)
Big Picture News, Informed Analysis
Cigarette packages come with warning labels. So should IPCC reports.
Yesterday, yet another research paper telling us that harmful climate change is headed our way grabbed headlines. Here in Canada, a national newspaper declared: Science team identifies tipping point in climate change: 2047. A radio station proclaimed: Climate change will devastate major cities by 2047, new study says.
But it was the coverage in the New York Times that was truly remarkable. The story there was 20 paragraphs long. This was paragraph number six:
The research comes with caveats. It is based on climate models, huge computer programs that attempt to reproduce the physics of the climate system and forecast the future response to greenhouse gases. Though they are the best tools available, these models contain acknowledged problems, and no one is sure how accurate they will prove to be at peering many decades ahead. [bold added]
View original post 113 more words
The GOLDEN RULE 
“Nero fiddles while Rome burns” …. real all about it.
In the meanwhile Fukushima continues to spew it’s radio-active poison and few scientists are having kittens over that? The plastic waste clogging up the oceans and trees that should be growing to absorb CO2 are becoming non-existent. The Amazon basin is being destroyed, yet we are supposed to be gaining carbon-credits from paper products and burghers?
The sort of energy to replace the carbon-based are being “sat-on” by the oil-producers. Yet apparently? It’s “our” fault?
I agree Jamie.
Strange priorities indeed.
So much energy spent on “dealing” with a non-existent problem, with no positive outcome whatever, and so little energy on a really serious issue, which needn’t have happened in the first place.
What is left of our so-called civilization in probably only a decade or so, will look back on our stupidity with awe.