Professor Palutikof said it would take a while for the effects of climate change to become visible. But without action, she said, “gradually, over time, that signal will emerge with resounding clarity”.
Well that’s inconvenient, isn’t it? So how about anomalous heat in the ocean, the melting of glaciers and arctic ice. How about the surface temperature and the sea level? How about droughts, floods, hurricanes and cyclones? You know — like the ones that are *not* found to be significantly increasing.
Jean Palutikof, director of the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility at Griffith University, in Queensland, said the findings of the UN report would “not surprise anyone involved in climate science”.
Condescending ass. Most people know little about the
whole field of climate science and do not have the time of day for it until they demonstrate robust predictions and the rigor of “mainstream” science. We attack it in our spare time because the claims are so incredibly extravagant, the practices so furtive and evasive, and little they say makes scientific sense.
However, Professor Steffen told the Ten Network’s The Bolt Report at the weekend that most experts agreed we would see an increase in intensity in cyclones as the warming continued.
Sorry, but I don’t see anything more than the same premature speculations. There is no clear plot of increasing energy over a long period. Sorry but I have no interest in what most climate experts agree on anymore.
Professor Steffen recently said:
”Well over 90 per cent of scientists in the area are quite clear: the Earth is warming and human activity is the major cause.” The blame for this ”phoney debate”, he believes, lies squarely with the media. ”A very small, very vocal minority is given the same weight,” he says.
You can call me a phoney but unless you’re omniscient, you don’t know the answer. And according to the report nobody does in most areas. So basically, you’re just calling anyone who questions the magnitude and cause of global warming a liar. Nice. Very professional.
You and Clive Hamilton make a good pair. On JoNova and Anthony Cox:
“But, hell, if like these two muppets you can pretend that thousands of scientists have made up two decades of research about global warming, you can attribute anything to anyone without any hesitation. It’s what they do. “
Both of these people are experts in their respective fields. I have developed new computational and statistical methods that helped to bring a new field of niche modeling to fruition. We don’t know science and its limitations? We don’t recognize the self-serving strategies of mediocre minds? Of course we do. Very very well.
Once and for all, I am not in any way, shape or form against some effects of CO2 somewhere. Show me exactly where I said that or please don’t mention it again. I am campaigning
for proper testing and proper critiques of claims instead of the fawning acceptance of AGW and undeserved praise
and adulation the IPCC has gotten from too many people in the CSIRO, the BoM and the government without proper evidence. If you want to raise objections to doing science properly, please feel free to justify it.