First, hackers leaked e-mails and other documents from some of the world’s leading climate scientists detailing how they refused to share data, plotted to keep dissenting scientists from getting published in leading journals and discarded original data.
Next, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admitted the Himalayan glaciers won’t disappear by 2035 and that claim was based on speculation. Now, according to the UK’s Times Online, head of the IPCC Dr Rajendra Pachauri, “admitted that there may have been other errors in the same section of the report, and said that he was considering whether to take action against those responsible.”
Andrew Revkin of the New York Times has more (bold added):
“The sections on the risks of extinction from warming in the report and the panel’s summaries are, at the very least, confusing.
In the Summary for Policy Makers of the report on climate impacts, there are different summations of extinction risk within a few pages. On page 6, the summary states: Approximately 20 to 30 percent of plant and animal species assessed so far are likely to be at increased risk of extinction if increases in global average temperature exceed 1.5 to 2.5°C. * N [4.4, T4.1]
In a chart on page 16, at a point marking a 2°C warming from the global average temperature through the 1980s and 1990s, a label reads: Up to 30 percent of species at increasing risk of extinction.
In the Summary for Policy Makers of the final Synthesis Report drawing on the entire 2007 assessment, the extinction risk is summarized in yet another way (the italics are from the report): There is medium confidence that approximately 20 to 30 percent of species assessed so far are likely to be at increased risk of extinction if increases in global average warming exceed 1.5 to 2.5°C (relative to 1980 to 1999).
I asked a half dozen I.P.C.C. scientists about this during a side session at the Copenhagen climate talks and, in particular, asked them to decipher for me the meaning of the nested qualifiers in that final statement. Among other things, how much would extinction risk rise? Basically, they acknowledged there was inconsistency and flawed writing.”
Remember, this is the report that won the IPCC the Nobel Prize in 2007 with Al Gore and the same report the EPA heavily relied on to suggest there was a scientific consensus on global warming. The EPA used this to make its endangerment finding that says greenhouse gases are dangerous pollutants and thus must be regulated. This report could have large implications for our economy. And it’s turning out that it has more errors than Bill Buckner.
How do I proceed to get a transcript of Charles's Krauthammer's address to The Heritage Foundation this week?
I love animals, but the fact is, extinction of animals is natural too!
Weren't the" man made global warming scammers and those indoctrinated" just complaining about the poisonous gases emitted from animals?
wish everyting is well,
we must do more things to protect our home
mbt
emu boots
Mr. Loris, thank you for additional sources of scientific evidence and disputed scientific evidence, as it exists currently.
One would assume and hope "The Library of Congress" would have such resources available for research and review by responsible members of our government. Key Word is responsible.
NO; you and I both know this is become a political and finacial issue, education is what the general public requires and I am not referring to movies, videos or speeches to our captive audience youth and older gullible students.
This administration has advertized and promoted "Science and Mathematics" as the primary objectives for our students and outlined and promised individuals pursuing those achievements in education "high paying jobs" guaranteed!
The problem is will our aspiring young students be taught viable science or political double speak? As we have seen those whom agree with what I will refer to as preferred science get grants, the promotions, and receive high recognition.
Those Scientists in dissent are scoffed at and defied funding or any recognition. THIS IS NOT RIGHT! THIS IS THE FIGHT!
Government needs to back out of the path of real experimentation and discovery to allow true high tech pursuit and true science boundaries to advance.
As long as a demented higher learning false society propagates goals and perverted result of laboratory results prevail our scientists of the future will not lead us in the proper natural direction, Sir!
They; the Scientists of the future will lead us in preferred political directions, SIR!
Wasn't that true of Galileo in his time… he did not go with the powers that be?? Who is all powerful in truth or in lies?
You are so right, and timely. The global warming fraud is a crime against humanity, and I do not say that lightly.
These fraudsters have been at this a long time and manipulated the data for at least since 1990 when they eliminated 75% of the temperature readings from the coldest spots on the planet to "induce" warming.
They need to go to jail.
.
I'm glad Heritage is on top of this. After all, it would be a shame to put a dent in our feudal system. Those serfs need to be kept in line. Only those with money are worthy to be attended to. May government of the people, by the money, for the moneyed, never perish from the earth.
(Let's see. Assume that the Bush and Obama administrations had not loaned money from current and future taxpayer-serfs to 'investment' banks. How big do you suppose those 2009 bonuses would be?)
Pingback: Obama, high on Liberal ‘Balls Beer,’ goes Don Quixote on America « VotingFemale
Pingback: PA Pundits - International
there's an old disease making a comeback that's called "rectalvizualitis". its caused by people having their heads up their rear ends for way too long a time: thus, a 'crappy' outlook on life.
what a shame the intelligent folks of our planet can't solve basic and fundamental issues before tackling mother nature. this planet has survived for millions and millions of years and will continue to do so. its only a matter of time before its present civilization (i use that word cautiously) becomes extinct for as long as religion and religious zealots continue to try and destroy decent societies this is of more importance that a "warming" trend. in my mind, global warming and all this other trite stuff is a distraction.
when will the world unite and end the mass murders of its citizens at the hands of despicable people who hide behind a religious philosophy?
finally, judging from the past 3 or 4 winters, global warming will be kept at bay by the jet stream. hopefully it will eradicate all that hot air 'rhetoric' regarding climate change.
respectfully submitted,
j w james III