Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Reasonable Doubt On IPCC Claims


Some who've read and analyzed the IPCC data for themselves.


2. Based on this warming trend, we are 66% confident that this is caused by man. In that 66% confidence level, we believe that if it is caused by man, we are 90% certain it is due to the rises in manmade CO2 since 1950. This is based on "models" that look at natural or external impacts and internal impacts - and the combination of both best fit what we would expect the result to be. That being said, "Limitations and gaps prevent more complete attribution of the causes of observed system responses to anthropogenic warming ... the available analyses are limited in the number of systems and locations considered .... natural temperature variability is larger at the regional than the global scale, thus affecting identification of changes due to external forcing". (In other words, we are flying by the seat of our pants on this conclusion)

3. "Nevertheless, the consistency between observed and modelled changes in several studies and the spatial agreement between significant regional warming and consistent impacts at the global scale is sufficient to conclude with high confidence that anthropogenic warming over the last three decades has had a discernible influence on many physical and biological systems." (Despite the shortcomings in our model, and the fact we could only get 300 scientists to agree to a 66% certainty, we the editors of said document think our models are accurate, and that being said, we are going to say we are 95% confident that global warming is manmade anyways, despite lack of concensus.)

4. Other effects of regional climate changes on natural and human environments are emerging, although many are difficult to discern due to adaptation and non-climatic drivers. We are 50% sure that northern crops benefit an early spring, 50% sure that forests are more likely to be affected by wildfire and pests. We are 50% sure that heat related diseases (i.e. transferred by mosquitos) are more prevalent, and 50% sure that there are more allergens. We are alos 50% sure that warming is having a negative impact on winter sports. (Only 50% sure....really?)

End Excerpts

More- click the link above.

Well, well, well...

Oh... and I recommend checking out this part of the IPCC report. It's damning. These guys are NOT at all certain about what they're talking about. It's obvious. They put, after each assertion, either one, two, or three asteriks after them, signifying varying levels of confidence in the assertions.


Looks like a lot of speculation and extrapolative hypothesization to me. Funny, but when I do that based on information available to me, folks think I'm fullashit or just plain nuts... so why don't folks also think the IPCC folks are fullashit/just plain nuts, too?

Overall, the IPCC thing is a lot of uncertain mumbo-jumbo.

To hear them claim, falsely, that there's "consensus", and go on to believe that the world is about to get real messed-up unless the Free World essentially shuts down its economy while the Non-Free World will contine to spew more and more and more greenhouse gases... is plainly stupid, insane, naive, guillible... and, of course, moonbatty.

My hope is that governments don't do anything rash, regardless of their rhetoric about believing the sky's falling, too. In fact, I'm, shall I say, highly confident and in consensus with me, myself and I, that the economy will not be harmed by the current government. After all, the Liberals under Environment Minister and current leader Stephane Dion did nothing and continued to allow more and more emissions ever so cavalierly. They didn't want to mess with the economy, themselves. They didn't want to commit political suicide by actually following the Kyoto Protocol, despite making a big, fat, hairy deal over it. And I'm sure the current government, while certainly doing far better for the environment than the all-talk, no action Liberals, will not do anything to harm our economy and livelihoods. Canada will have a made-in-Canada solution to various environmental issues which don't essentially amount to jumping into an unknown body of water from a cliff, like Liberals want us to do (never jump into any body of water unless you know for certain it's safe- test it with your toe, see that it's deep enough, etc... don't just jump 'cause some asshats tell you to!)