Ridiculous loaded gun analogy: ‘…staring down the barrel of climate change’

From Stanford’s News Service, comes this hyper PR. Red mine. In case anybody wants to go or watch, there will be a live feed.

Stanford climate scientist to discuss state of climate science, coming risks

WHO: Chris Field, professor of interdisciplinary environmental studies at Stanford University and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Working Group II.

 WHAT: The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field. He will speak on the topic. 

WHEN: Friday, Feb. 14, 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. CST.

WHERE: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, Hyatt Regency, Grand Ballroom B, 151 E. Wacker Dr., Chicago.

Field will discuss “Research Challenges in Managed and Natural Ecosystem Responses to Climate Change” as part of the “Research Challenges in Climate Change: What’s New and Where Are We Going?” symposium.

Field will also take part in a related news briefing on Feb. 13 at 2 p.m. CST in the Vevey 3 Room of AAAS Newsroom Headquarters in the Swissôtel, 323 East Upper Wacker Dr. The briefing will be streamed live on EurekAlert.org.

In a talk based on a paper he co-authored with Stanford Associate Professor of Environmental Earth System Science Noah Diffenbaugh, Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change and what risks and emerging challenges we should expect.

-30-

126 thoughts on “Ridiculous loaded gun analogy: ‘…staring down the barrel of climate change’

  1. Wouldn’t a flamethrower have been a better metaphor? A gun seems so boring when compared to the usual level of hysteria that The Cause evokes.

  2. This is the equivalent of Russian Roulette with one blank in one of the chambers. Chances are it’s just gonna go “click” but even if it fires the shot is insignificant. (as in woah the global temp fluctuated 0.4 degrees or .8 degrees in 34 years)

  3. Field will also take part in a related news briefing on Feb. 13 at 2 p.m. CST in the Vevey 3 Room of AAAS Newsroom Headquarters in the Swissôtel, 323 East Upper Wacker Dr.

    East Upper Wacker Dr.
    *snort*

  4. The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field. He will speak on the topic.

    The dinosaurs would likely disagree.

  5. He has told bear faced lies already. The ice-core data show that the rate of warming over the last 150 years is nothing compared to the last 4 inter-glacials were warmer than today by between 2-4 degrees Celcius. The peaks at the inter-glacials shows higher temperatures at the start, then general cooling interrupted by mini-peaks of low level warming before descending into the next ice-age. I believe it’s referred to in scientific & technical terminology as bullshit! Yet another weird study to arising from that illustrious education facility!

  6. “Bloke down the pub says:
    February 13, 2014 at 9:19 am

    Is that connected to pork-barrel politics?”

    More like pork-barrel science, the kind of hyperbolic, sensationalistic fear mongering the truly desperate and self serving believe will keep them sitting in their 1st Class Seat on the Glowball Warming Gravy Train.

  7. …The world is staring down the barrel of climate change …

    It’s not so bad. The first time I heard about Global Warming it was going to fry the Earth’s surface like Venus. The last time I heard about it it was only 4 Hiroshima bombs. And now it’s down to a rifle.

    Looks to me like it’s travelling in the right direction…

  8. “27 climate models” And they all suck at hindcasting and forecasting. Brought to you by central casting.

  9. …analysis of 27 models…

    I think Dr. Spencer’s analysis of those models will be better: They are 95% wrong.

  10. What is annoying is that he is blatantly claiming something that is easily shown to be untrue. Temperature changes coming out of the last ice age, according to studies based on historical changes, were increasing by multiple degrees of temperature in the 100 year range.
    That change was much higher than current changes. Even the IPCC admits that climate sensitivities are likely on the low side of the range promoted over the last few years. This raises questions about just what this academic is trying to accomplish.

  11. At least a gun’s trigger is an example of a “tipping point”.

    > WHERE: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, Hyatt Regency, Grand Ballroom B, 151 E. Wacker Dr., Chicago.

    Is that close to Heartland? Hmm, they’re at One South Wacker Drive #2740. I wonder if there’s an east and west.

  12. and now we have a government whose stated goal is to deny the rights of skeptics to even point out that the AGW hypesters are not being honest.

  13. I am sure some voter that is at best ill informed will wet their pants and bring up the idea of AGW with a clue of what is going on.

    Got to counter the hype and the lies somehow.

  14. Who plays Russian Roulette and gets disappointed when there is no bullet in the chamber? It isn’t normal.

  15. Well, faster than at any time in 65 million years ONLY IF you take the runaway models as actual evidence, which apparently they have. The reality is that there is nothing exceptional of our current minor increase in temps since the end of the last ice age and our little increase isn’t even the largest or the fastest that’s occurred in 10000 years, much less 65 million years.

    Very sad.

  16. climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field …
    as he knows from 1st person experience since he was there for the entire period and had both his handi-dandi data logger and the perspicacity to record it for future use

  17. “Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change”

    27 Photo models may be able to reveal something that can send room temps soaring if the room is packed with suitably interested people and 27 building models may send the heart rate of developers soaring but climate models being projections based on some historical and lots of futuristic data inputs (real and imagined) can not reveal anything, only observational data over a suitably long time period can. Even then, the “revealing” can only happen after the events and this has now revealed that the “pace” has gone on holiday for the last 16 odd years. As such the above statement is a load of crock.

  18. Is it not time to just say these doom-mongers are pathological liars and be done with it? It is horribly cold here in Daytona Beach, Florida today and we have had no temperature rise globally for 17+ years. Where is any evidence of what this turkey was whining about?

  19. “Professor of Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies”? What, he’s a librarian? How is that anything but a weak sociology position? As it is, “Environmental Studies” is pretty weak on the ground in most areas. That kind of suggests he’s a “knows jack, master of none” sort of academic, or am I just being too harsh…? /boohoo. Soon we’ll have a new kind of IT discipline: Intellectual Trolling. Hrrmmph.

  20. Forecast is for 20*F Windchill 8*F.
    Average High / low temps for this date : 35*F 18*F
    From Stanford and visiting Chicago. Here is a little background for showing how the Chicago area is “staring down the barrel of climate change:

    “This winter, the coldest in decades, has been a long, cold haul for Chicagoans. The area is in the midst of its fourth consecutive month of below normal temps. And NOT just modestly colder than normal—- February is running an eye-catching 14.5-degrees below normal and 8 of the month’s first 11 days—73% of them— have produced double-digit daily temp deficits.
    This winter now ranks among the coldest 5% since 1871. It’s the 3rd snowiest on the books to date with more than 62 inches of snow to its credit, and has produced more 0 and sub-zero days through Feb. 11 of any over the past 143 years.”
    I sure he will get a warm reception, from the true believers. But at least reality will smack them up-side the head, when they go outside.

  21. Didn’t Steven Chu use the same ah, metaphor at a recent meeting?
    As the recent winter blast in most of the US is now a factor it is a matter of time
    before someone says :”Who are you gonna believe, Me or your lyin’ eyes?”

  22. With the likes of Ehrlich and this clown, Field, it’s a good thing Stanford has Svalgaard and Pande as a balance.

  23. timothy sorenson says:
    February 13, 2014 at 9:33 am

    ” … They are 95% wrong.”
    —-l
    You are being far too generous :)

  24. Well, 65 million years ago, CO2 atmospheric concentration was about 1000 ppm, versus today’s 390 ppm, and the world did not end way back then. It was a whole lot more further back, and still the world did not end.

  25. If your kids are majoring in anything that ends with the word “studies,” I hope they have the social skills to get a job at Starbucks after they waste your money on college.

  26. This alarmist hype is the panicky reaction to the loss of their credibility in the public eye. It is the none-to-bright fishing for the none-too-bright.

  27. Temperatures have been flat for over a decade, no increase in hurricane activity, no increase in tornadoes, no accelerated sea level increase and no accelerated increase in atmospheric CO2. I want to see some climate change, where is it?

  28. No matter what this guy’s credentials are, he’s not an expert – except, perhaps at lying and fearmongering.

    He gives himself away by talking of analyzing models – well, we know models are worthless constructs that prove only the incompetence, dishonesty ad amorality of their creators. Where’s the EVIDENCE? Obviously he ain’t got any.

  29. I second what Russ R says @ 10:14. With the vicious winter Chicagoans have suffered through, I will be surprised if more than 1/2 dozen people show up.

    Someone should turn off the heat and open the windows to let the audience feel “climate change” for themselves. They’ll think they’re staring down the barrel of a snow cannon.

  30. “In a talk based on a paper he co-authored with Stanford Associate Professor of Environmental Earth System Science Noah Diffenbaugh, Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change and what risks and emerging challenges we should expect.”
    It’s supposed to be science Jim, but it’s not as we knew it.

  31. Current conditions don’t even come close to being unprecedented in the last 1000 years let alone 65 million. The Great Famine of 1315-17 came about at the end of the Mediaeval Warming period when the climate suddenly become colder.

    Basically Spring didn’t arrive in 1315 and weather remained wet and cold all year leading to greatly reduced crop yields. This was bad enough to cause a famine but things went from bad to worse when the cold weather persisted through 1316 and the crops failed again. This was a disaster, with no reserves left people were forced to eat their seed crops and their animals. When spring finally arrived in 1317 there was little seed corn to plant and few peasants strong enough. The weather didn’t really settle down until 1330 and the new climate was markedly cooler so areas where wheat could be grown had to switch to barley while upland arable farming become impossible in much of Northern Europe.

    Millions died of starvation with the population decreasing by as much as 25% in Northern Europe

    THATS a loaded gun.

    Keith

  32. more soylent green! says:
    February 13, 2014 at 10:26 am

    “If your kids are majoring in anything that ends with the word “studies,” I hope they have the social skills to get a job at Starbucks after they waste your money on college.”

    At the very least, the ones that major in social studies.

    I took an Internet course in interpersonal communication at a state community college for credit towards an associate degree in IT.
    Never spoke with the instructor or any students once during the course, and the course
    did not require any such interaction, other than than the examiner at the physical location where mid-term and final exams were held. I got an “A”.

  33. “The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field.”

    Absolute bullshit.

    To make such a claim would require data with sufficient resolution to detect such rapid change in the past. The “rapid change” we are all supposed to be scared of ran from 1974 to 1997. ie 23 years at most.

    That means that you need a dataset with AT LEAST 20 y resolution.

    some ice core records may go back to about 1500 AD with that kind of resolution The long records have much less resolution , especiall further back.

    So had such a change occurred in the past we would have no record of it and Chris Field’s statment is totally with evidence.

    I guess that must be what qualifes him as a “climate expert”.

  34. Dr Field has a lot of experience in the subject; lead author of AR4 for the IPCC. But probably hasn’t stuck his head out of the ivory tower in years.

  35. The Stanford happy hour special: Desperation Cocktail – a delicious green melange of models, catastrophism & policies – best shaken not stirred. Half-price at happy hour only at Wacker Dr.

  36. Geez, we know hardly anything about the rate of climate change during events over the last 65 millions years. Just that statement alone shows that this man is an idiot, unaware of the realities of science, the world around him, and how stupid he sounds.

    How are we to be alarmed when there has been no significant warming in almost 22 years, cooling since 2002, and active cooling since 2006? If this is rapid change, what does slow look like; it must be truly boring.

    Yep, he really knows his alarmism, but not his science.

  37. No climate expert would miss these below, an environmentalist pretending to be a climate expert more like. (charlatan)

    Ihttp://www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_SedimentCores/paleoclimatology_sediment_cores_2.php

    Ocean sediments provide scientific evidence that the claims of recent global warming being unprecedented for 65 million years are false.

    Ice cores from both Greenland and Antarctica also show there have been huge changes, much bigger and faster than the tiny 0.6c rise observed in global temperatures since the 1850s.

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v366/n6455/abs/366552a0.html

    http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Paleoclimatology_IceCores/

    http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/bas_research/science_briefings/icecorebriefing.php

  38. Just in the last 65 million years, then? That means it happened before, what’s the problem?

    (Geologists, taking the long view since 1785.)

  39. Now this ‘loaded gun’. Wouldn’t be a popgun by any chance, would it? Because the corks out of those things really smart.

    We really are all doomed, aren’t we?

  40. The amount of warming that has been documented in the oceans since 2005 here on WUWT is enough to warm the atmosphere by over 20 degrees Fahrenheit, every day and night, throughout the year.

    That is a VERY significant amount of warming. If even a small percentage of that ocean warming trend shifts away from the oceans and into the atmosphere, we will see dramatic and catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, indeed.

  41. Well, at least I can sight in a 7mm Remington magnum using ballistic tables derived from empirical experience and hit the target at three hundred yards with real bullets on the first shot after laser bore sighting at twenty yards, but so far the climate models and their shooters haven’t hit squat no matter what the range after repeated attempts. Maybe they’re shooting blanks, have a bad trigger, a crooked barrel, poor technique, or they’re numerical models are crap?

  42. Sure if he’s talking about climate shifts as we slip into another solar grand minimum (for which there is at least past form of sorts). But somehow it just sounds like worry bead and ducking stool stuff.

  43. Russ R. says: @ February 13, 2014 at 10:14 am

    Forecast is for 20*F Windchill 8*F…..
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Oh to be able to play Hansen’s Congressional Trick and shut down the heat the night before….

  44. Greg Goodman says:
    February 13, 2014 at 10:47 am

    “The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field.”

    Absolute bullshit.
    ___________________________________________________________
    Damn, I was going to post about data resolution we could possibly have on temps 65M years ago. Good think I read yours to avoid the embarrassment.

    So given our mutual thought, I have another comment. Why 65M years? Why not say at any time in the entire history of the Earth? That statement would have equal scientific accuracy.

  45. LT says:
    February 13, 2014 at 10:41 am
    …. I want to see some climate change, where is it?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    It is presently coming down out of the sky and piling up on the already accumulated white stuff littering my fields. Darn it! I moved south to get away from solidified GoreBull Warming.

    Has Al Gore been visiting Obama by any chance?

    (I hope Al Gore shows up in Chicago for this event. They will be snowed in for days.)

  46. ja1 m1tchell:

    At February 13, 2014 at 11:15 am you say

    The amount of warming that has been documented in the oceans since 2005 here on WUWT is enough to warm the atmosphere by over 20 degrees Fahrenheit, every day and night, throughout the year.

    OK. Accepting your assertions as being true for sake of argument, then please explain how that degraded heat can “warm the atmosphere by over 20 degrees Fahrenheit”.

    It would be hard for it to warm the atmosphere by over 0.02 degrees Fahrenheit.

    I am eager to learn how you think this miracle of reverse thermodynamics can happen because I have ideas for some lucrative devices which would be based on whatever explanation you can provide.

    Richard

  47. jai mitchell says:
    February 13, 2014 at 11:15 am
    The amount of warming that has been documented in the oceans since 2005 here on WUWT is enough to warm the atmosphere by over 20 degrees Fahrenheit, every day and night, throughout the year.

    It does not matter how big the ocean is and even if it were big enough to raise the temperature of the atmosphere by 500 C, it would NOT matter. That is because of laws of thermodynamics. Even if we accept that the ocean has warmed up by 0.1 C, that means it can only warm the atmosphere by 0.1 C. You CANNOT cool the ocean by 0.1 C and warm the atmosphere by any larger amount in the process.

  48. jai mitchell says:

    February 13, 2014 at 11:15 am

    You are kidding right. 20F every day for a year! That is going to be 20 x 365 = 7300 degrees. You know that the oceans boil around 212 F don’t cha.

  49. In the next James Bond movie, we’ll see 007 sneaking through the halls of Stanford late at night. On a mission to save the world, he finally reaches the computers, and unplugs them. With the models killed, we’ll live happily ever after.

    God save the Queen!

  50. Cold wave & fuel shortages caused massive deaths
    The projected global warming impacts are mild compared to historic consequences of a severe 3 year cold period and/or fuel shortages.
    e.g. Finland lost 1/3 of its population in 1695-97. due to cold causing agriculture to collapse.

    North Korea lost is diesel imports and tractor parts after the fall of the Soviet Union.
    That caused loss of industrialized agriculture. This combined with floods caused between 240,000 and 3,500,000 deaths from starvation in 1994-1998.

    Our greatest tasks are to prepare replacement fuels for current 6%/year oil field depletion, and prepare for natural variations in climate!
    All climate alarm is insignificant by comparison.

  51. don says:
    February 13, 2014 at 11:20 am
    but so far the climate models and their shooters haven’t hit squat

    In that case, they just need to make the “barn door” so wide that they cannot miss.

    From an earlier post:
    Met Office 2014 Prediction
    19 December 2013 – “The global average temperature in 2014 is expected to be between 0.43 C and 0.71 C above…

    That is a range of 0.28. To put it another way, the difference in rankings between #1 and #19 is only 0.253 on Hadcrut4. If they want to make the “barn door” that wide, how can they miss? On top of that, they are only 90% confident of this. As well, their forecasts are to be used for:
    “It also has a broad range of potential applications
    in terms of policy making and investment decisions.”

    How useful is that?

    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/1/8/decadal_forecast_2014-2018_jan2014.pdf

  52. ” staring down the barrel of climate change ” Really? Actually he’s right, and that barrel is loaded with Aluminum, sulphur, strontium, silver iodide, barium etc

    Staring down the barrel of climate change…… give me break.

  53. Well Just in time; one of our SF Bay area T&V stations, just last night broadcast (6PM news) that the LL laser squisher had just made a thermonuclear reaction that put out more energy than was put in. Er ! ********* some asterisks there; just WHAT energy was put in ??

    I think they mean the energy of the single laser splat that squished their fuel chamber into nothingness, compared to the mini Hydrogen; excuse me that’s Tritium bomb explosion energy.

    Well maybe they would do it again today, but now they are off somewhere building a brand new fuel chamber / gas can * because the last one got broken by the power generation.

    Now I don’t think they count the energy * it takes to round up some tritium, and then build a nice and spherical gas can around it to then squish that..

    I’m fairly certain they don’t count all of the gridded electricity * that it takes to fire up that laser for just that one blatch . Not to mention powering all the computers * that just sit there and watch this, and count the calories as they come out of the gas can when it ruptures / implodes.

    Now how many minimum wage jobs do you think it is going to create for people to pick up those itty bitty fuel cans, maybe with gloved hands, and tweezers * to pop them on the chopping block ready to go splatsville.

    Well I see that they probably won’t use their laser splatterer to squish Tritium fuel capsules; they are building * going to build 8 or thinking of building tthis Tomahawk; er, Tokomak to try squishing gallons of Tritium, to get some electricity worth putting on the grid. Well I think they have built a big building in France somewhere to hold their Tokomonster.

    Like Mrs Nancy Pelosi says; “we have to build the thing to see if it works.”

    Where are the nearest Tritium mines to earth ??

  54. Oh no!!!!!!

    The Antarctic sea ice extents INCREASED AT A DISASTROUS RATE THROUGHOUT ALL OF 2013!

    January 1, Antarctic sea ice extents were only 7.0 million km^2,
    but by 31 December – only 12 months later – Antarctic sea ice has crept up closer to the increasingly vulnerable South America shores to a record-breaking 9.0 million square kilometers!

    At this rate, Cape Horn will be blocked to all sea traffic in less than 10 years!

  55. Richard S Courneys post at: February 13, 2014 at 11:31 am
    I admire your patience and perseverance when dealing with all kind of trolls.
    Though this one was no challenge at all. Some of them really don´t understand when to yield.

  56. Actually the minion is correct, he is staring down the barrel of a change of political climate.
    Remember it is 100% projection, what they accuse= what they are.
    It is over, the biggest scam ever attempted by the UN is collapsing, the political climate is changing, angry citizens are turning on their elected and appointed fools, at an ever increasing rate.
    The kind of rage I feel toward the persons involved, will not fade gently away.
    I have been betrayed,impoverished and assaulted by fools and bandits.
    My tolerance for the petty corruptions, the minor power abuses and bureaucratic over step is gone.
    Left unchecked politicians and bureaucrats will always produce these kind of fiasco.
    So whether an individual has acted from personal stupidity or for personal gain is irrelevant, their actions have damaged us all.
    Our civic structures stand revealed as infested with useless parasites.
    Any clue as to how one negotiates with a parasite?.

  57. jai mitchell says:
    February 13, 2014 at 11:15 am

    1.5×10^22 joules reach the planets surface every day from the sun.

    5.48×10^25 joules reach the planet surface every decade (2 days for leap year included)

    For Northern hemisphere 5.31×10^21 joules is only 0.00969% of the suns energy over a decade.

    For Southern hemisphere 6.91×10^21 joules is only 0.0126% of the suns energy over a decade.

    Therefore one percent increase in solar energy reaching the ocean surface due to declining global cloud levels for a decade represents 5.48×10^23 joules.

    The energy rises demonstrated in the ocean for NH and SH are orders smaller than even solar increase by just a one percent decline in global low cloud levels for the same period.

    Those energy changes are tiny to any change in global cloud levels.

  58. george e. smith says:
    February 13, 2014 at 11:45 am

    There is a large amount of Tritium in the oceans, ….

    But it “is” radioactive … and so will be prohibited once collected from being used as fuel in California. (Modestly “easier” to separate compared to U233, U235, U238 though.)

    Then again, you could “re-cycle” and separate the Tritium you create inside light water reactors ….but those are also frowned upon by Pelosi’s and Feinhelm’s California voters.

  59. I’m fairly certain they don’t count all of the gridded electricity * that it takes to fire up that laser for just that one blatch . Not to mention powering all the computers * that just sit there and watch this, and count the calories as they come out of the gas can when it ruptures / implodes.

    Actually, nearly everything you assert is wrong, and getting past break even is actually a fairly exciting milestone in controlled fusion. Yes, they have a ways to go, but break even is way better than lose a bit or lose a lot. Fusion, if we ever work out the kinks, is basically an inexhaustible energy resource.

    Tritium is easier to break even with than Deuterium (and hence an obvious choice for an initial fuel) but if they get to where they can fuse Deuterium, we will simply never run out of fuel and if we did the solar system is lousy with the stuff and even with “shipping” (from, say, Europa to the Earth) it would still be profitable. Also, if they ever get fusion plants running, they can probably run them (or fission plants now) in breeder mode and create more tritium out of Deuterium plus surplus neutrons produced by some of the fission pathways.

    To put it another way, if fusion ever does work out to become an economically and technically feasible energy supply, human civilization will be able to run for millions of years at 21st century standard of living consumption rates before significantly depleting the fuel reserves cheaply available in the oceans, let alone the solar system. Deuterium is common as dirt, in a manner of speaking.

    As for loaded gun analogies and much more — until AR5 is directly addressed and its shortcomings made public in an open, extended, statistical “peer review” process, even people who are completely honest and truly do mean well are going to make mistakes. Every additional year without warming adds statistical weight to the probability that the GCMs are broken and completely without skill in their long range forecasts. The problem is that I would bet that most climate scientists have not read chapter 9 of AR5, and if they did their eyes glazed right over the part where it basically admitted that the models in CMIP5 could not be used to make predictions with any statistically defensible confidence at best, nor did they critically examine the figures that more or less directly demonstrate their inability to hindcast even the immediate “past” prior to the first reference year, 1961 or the immediate “future” of the last reference year, 1990.

    rgb

  60. What makes a “professor of interdisciplinary environmental studies” a climate expert. A sewage expert, or landfill expert, perhaps, but doesn’t he know this climate science requires a knowledge of physics, chemistry and geology (paleoclimate). “Staring down the barrel of a gun” is one of those subliminal images that probably all alarmist clisci types are feeling these days.

  61. Here is Stanford staring down a fully ladened oil barrel.

    Exxon-Led Group Is Giving A Climate Grant to Stanford
    Four big international companies, including the oil giant Exxon Mobil, said yesterday that they would give Stanford University $225 million over 10 years….In 2000, Ford and Exxon Mobil’s global rival, BP, gave $20 million to Princeton to start a similar climate and energy research program…”
    Source: New York Times – 21 November 2002

    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/21/us/exxon-led-group-is-giving-a-climate-grant-to-stanford.html

    This is just one of the ’causes’ of ‘climate change’.

  62. “The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field. He will speak on the topic.”

    Don’t sit in the front row! It sounds like the audience will be staring down the barrel of a loaded bull’s lower intestine.

  63. “If the data don’t support you, you’re wrong”, A. Einstein. I think many climate scientists are digging a hole deeper and deeper, that they may not be able to climb out of.

  64. Stanford Global Climate & Energy Project is funded by the following.

    ExxonMobil
    The world’s largest publicly traded international oil and gas company.

    GE
    The world leader in power-generation technology and services.

    Schlumberger
    The world’s leading oilfield services technology company.

    DuPont
    Providing world-class science for the global marketplace since 1802.

    Bank of America
    One of the world’s leading financial institutions.

    Former GCEP Sponsor:
    Toyota
    The leading global auto manufacturer of hybrid and advanced technology vehicles.

    We must fight climate change and the causes of climate change. We must act now!

  65. Paywalled, computational models all the way down, need to say no more.

    Science 2 August 2013:
    Vol. 341 no. 6145 pp. 486-492
    DOI: 10.1126/science.1237123
    Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions
    Noah S. Diffenbaugh, Christopher B. Field

    ABSTRACT
    Terrestrial ecosystems have encountered substantial warming over the past century, with temperatures increasing about twice as rapidly over land as over the oceans. Here, we review the likelihood of continued changes in terrestrial climate, including analyses of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project global climate model ensemble. Inertia toward continued emissions creates potential 21st-century global warming that is comparable in magnitude to that of the largest global changes in the past 65 million years but is orders of magnitude more rapid. The rate of warming implies a velocity of climate change and required range shifts of up to several kilometers per year, raising the prospect of daunting challenges for ecosystems, especially in the context of extensive land use and degradation, changes in frequency and severity of extreme events, and interactions with other stresses.

  66. ai mitchell says:
    February 13, 2014 at 11:15 am

    Therefore one percent increase in solar energy reaching the ocean surface due to declining global cloud levels for a decade represents 5.48×10^23 joules.

    This value I might add was if the planet had 100% ocean surface.

    The ocean surface is 71% so this value changes to 3.89×10^23 joules, still orders larger than any calculated ocean energy rise in both the NH and SH.

    Finally those rises would cause 20f ever day over a decade?

    No, they wouldn’t.

    That would mean over the same period the sun would cause 1296 f increase for one day.

  67. “Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change”

    So, an analysis on the pace of models of questionable veracity when compared to measurements in nature. What a waste of time and money. It seems like insanity to base so much other work on models that don’t forecast well yet. Doesn’t anyone in this bizarro-science field say to themselves “Hey, why should we base our research on these models when most of them are starting to fall outside of their 95% CI when compared with measurements in nature?”

  68. Chris Field, professor of interdisciplinary environmental studies at Stanford University …..
    Beats me how anyone can become a professor and keep his post after telling a deliberate lie. Never mind keeping it after a mistake as severe as this statement, “staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years,”.

    But lets face it, “evironmental” has less to do with “environ” as “mental”. Its a code word for political sociology.

    Where is he heading? For the money of course!

  69. “Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change…”

    Wow. They really don’t get it, do they?

  70. “The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field.”
    &
    “Stanford Associate Professor of Environmental Earth System Science Noah Diffenbaugh, Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change and what risks and emerging challenges we should expect”.
    ______________________________________________
    Statements like the above from so called climate scientists are arguably amongst the most destructive means possible that is leading to the destroying of the image and respect for science of every type.

    It also reminds me that about one half of the population is below the average IQ levels.

    I am now coming to the conclusion that based on their continuing and clearly demonstrated ability to continually mouth of utter rubbish and total nonsense about how climate models are predicting the End Times for Homo sapiens unless we “do something” like give up our dirty habits of enjoying being warm or cool or driving to the supermarket for food or give up reading about climate scientists flying off for thousands of kilometres to exotic locations for their “conferences”, that the greater majority of climate warming scientists are definitely drawn from the bottom half of the population’s average IQ levels,

    And they even seem have this incredible almost super human like ability to be able to continue this spouting off of complete and utter nonsense about how climate models are predicting the End Times despite mounting evidence that climate models are nothing more than an extension of the modellers own opinions and are little more than and endless sink hole for the public’s hard earned
    And the climate warming scientists do this mouthing off of model predicted imminent climate disasters without any evidence of shame or doubt despite apparently not even bothering to even look out of the ivory tower’s windows just to check if it is even daylight outside let alone what else might be happening in the real world.

    Note to real scientists;
    Start cleaning up science’s act and fast before you all go down the gurgler of public opinion .
    And don’t blame us, the public, if you find your funding shut off and any lingering respect for science disappearing down the rat hole of public opinion.
    You will have brought this entirely on yourselves alone through your outright stupidity in allowing this non stop, continual spouting off of complete and utter nonsense from what is a so called and now steadily becoming a completely discredited and badly misnamed branch of science called “climate science”.
    A branch of science where “astrology” would have been a far more appropiate description and even that would have been high praise for what passes as climate science today..

  71. The computer models might well show extreme warming, but if you base your models on a fiction such as radiative forcing then so too are your results a fiction.

  72. john robertson says: @ February 13, 2014 at 12:01 pm
    … The kind of rage I feel toward the persons involved, will not fade gently away…. My tolerance for the petty corruptions, the minor power abuses and bureaucratic over step is gone….

    Any clue as to how one negotiates with a parasite?.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    We can always use the examples from history: Image 1 or Image 2

  73. “Stanford climate scientist to discuss state of climate science, coming risks”
    and
    “Chris Field, professor of interdisciplinary environmental studies …” (whatever the hack that is)
    and
    “The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years,”

    I really doubt the good professor has any interest in a discussion.

  74. rgbatduke says: @ February 13, 2014 at 12:19 pm
    ….The problem is that I would bet that most climate scientists have not read chapter 9 of AR5, and if they did their eyes glazed right over the part where it basically admitted that the models in CMIP5 could not be used to make predictions with any statistically defensible confidence at best, nor did they critically examine the figures that more or less directly demonstrate their inability to hindcast even the immediate “past” prior to the first reference year, 1961 or the immediate “future” of the last reference year, 1990.

    rgb
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    This guy is going to “discuss state of climate science, coming risks” and his talk “is based on a paper he co-authored with Stanford Associate Professor of Environmental Earth System Science Noah Diffenbaugh, Field will describe what analysis of 27 climate models revealed about the pace of climate change and what risks and emerging challenges we should expect.”

    In other words he darn well KNOW chapter 9 of AR5 backwards and forwards and be able to quote it blindfolded. This is not some brain dead reporter… well at least he is not a reporter… well… I think he may be human.

    He really has no excuse. He is a paid propagandist.

  75. UnfrozenCavemanMD …
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Shouldn’t you change your name to Frozen Caveman? I have been feeling like a frozen troglodyte. All the windows were glazed with ice so little light got through this gloomy day.

  76. Jimbo says:
    February 13, 2014 at 12:56 pm

    WHAT: The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field…..

    The abrupt climate change of the Younger Dryas occured over a decade or so.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    “Abrupt Climate Change – Inevitable Surprises”, Committee on Abrupt Climate Change, National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, 2002, ISBN: 0-309-51284-0, 244 pages, Richard B. Alley, chair : http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309074347

    From the opening paragraph in the executive summary:

    Recent scientific evidence shows that major and widespread climate changes have occurred with startling speed. For example, roughly half the north Atlantic warming since the last ice age was achieved in only a decade, and it was accompanied by significant climatic changes across most of the globe. Similar events, including local warmings as large as 16°C, occurred repeatedly during the slide into and climb out of the last ice age….

    In the book, The Two-Mile Time Machine: Ice Cores, Abrupt Climate Change, and Our Future Richard Alley, one of the world’s leading climate researchers, tells the fascinating history of global climate changes as revealed by reading the annual rings of ice from cores drilled in Greenland. In the 1990s he and his colleagues made headlines with the discovery that the last ice age came to an abrupt end over a period of only three years….
    (wwwDOT)amazon.com/Two-Mile-Time-Machine-Abrupt-Climate/dp/0691102961

  77. “Research Challenges in Managed and Natural Ecosystem Responses to Climate Change”
    “…Managed Ecosystem…”
    Or, as I like to think of it, “Playing God.”

  78. John Lennon said happiness is a warm gun, mama. Unless you just shot yourself in the foot.

    Speaking of old songs about climate change, mustn’t forget Dylan’s classic:

    The science is settled, the debate it is done.
    Earth’s warming is caused by mankind not the sun,
    And deniers must not be allowed to have fun,
    Exposing our lies and evasions.
    Let’s string up the skeptics and cut out their tongues,
    ‘fore the climate reverses its changin’!

  79. How can Stanford stand for this?

    But seriously, why is no one preventing the credibility of the institution from being dragged to zero? Is there not one rational person on the faculty going to show him some ice cores or sediment studies that prove his assertions are incorrect? Shame on the lot. As I’ve said before, when fellow scientists are soon to be unemployed with zero respect, don’t expect me to have one ounce of sympathy. They brought it upon themselves by remaining silent to the foolish lies of their collegues.

  80. Gary Pearse says:
    February 13, 2014 at 12:26 pm
    What makes a “professor of interdisciplinary environmental studies” a climate expert. A sewage expert, or landfill expert, perhaps, but doesn’t he know this climate science requires a knowledge of physics, chemistry and geology (paleoclimate). “Staring down the barrel of a gun” is one of those subliminal images that probably all alarmist clisci types are feeling these days.

    *****

    You forgot the most important one – Thermodynamics.

  81. Don’t worry too much, folks. If our recent experience in the UK is anything to go by, the “gun” is just a Super Soaker.

  82. I wonder what Condoleezza Rice would have to say about Field and the bad .light he is casting on Stanford.

  83. They are the ones who have loaded the PR gun. I’m thankful we have blogs like WUWT, not to mention Ma’ Nature Herself, to act as the safety.
    (For those unfamiliar with the workings of a gun, if the safety is “ON” you can pull the trigger as often as you like. Nothing will happen.)

  84. @Gail Combs 1:19, item 2 please.
    Much as I would rather not see the reset by mob.
    We seem incapable of rational behaviour as a group.
    Perhaps this communication tool can help head off the madness.

  85. So, let me get this right, CO2 increases, traps infrared radiation (IR), and we all fry, right? But, what if the CO2 does not trap IR? Who would know if it does? How about a scientist who uses IR to look at the stars, they would have to know if the IR they were looking at was being blocked by the atmosphere, right? So lets see what one says:

    IR Expert Speaks Out After 40 Years Of Silence : “IT’S THE WATER VAPOR STUPID and not the CO2″
    I’m a professional infrared astronomer who spent his life trying to observe space through the atmosphere’s back-radiation that the environmental activists claim is caused by CO2 and guess what? In all the bands that are responsible for back radiation in the brightness temperatures (color temperatures) related to earth’s surface temperature (between 9 microns and 13 microns for temps of 220K to 320 K) there is no absorption of radiation by CO2 at all. In all the bands between 9 and 9.5 there is mild absorption by H2O, from 9.5 to 10 microns (300 K) the atmosphere is perfectly clear except around 9.6 is a big ozone band that the warmists never mention for some reason. From 10 to 13 microns there is more absorption by H2O. Starting at 13 we get CO2 absorption but that wavelength corresponds to temperatures below even that of the south pole. Nowhere from 9 to 13 microns do we see appreciable absorption bands of CO2. This means the greenhouse effect is way over 95% caused by water vapor and probably less than 3% from CO2.

    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/ir-expert-speaks-out-after-40-years-of-silence-its-the-water-vapor-stupid-and-not-the-co2/

    Simply put, this says that “the science of radiative transfer” is falsified. Since that is the very heart of CAGW, then the whole “science” falls apart. If “radiative transfer” simply doesn’t work with the IR at the frequency the earth gives it off, then CO2 cannot heat the planet.

    If this is true, then the expected increase in temperature of the air at 12 Km altitude in the tropics that “radiative transfer” from CO2 should be causing would also not be present, and guess what, it isn’t. That is now two absolute proofs that “the science of radiative transfer’, without which Global Warming cannot happen, is false.

    Science, make a guess, make a prediction, with numbers, about that guess, then see if reality, observed through experiment or observation matches your prediction. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t matter how wonderful and true the idea seems, how many scientists are said to believe it, how great those scientists are said to be, or anything else, if your prediction is wrong, drop the idea.

    The “science of radiative transfer”, by CO2 at least, has now been shown false, falsified, twice, by actual observation. It is now time to drop it entirely.
    This is the heart of the matter, everything else you see, on this site or any other, is just dancing around on the edges.

  86. Thanks Gail Combs. This 65 million years of fastest climate change is obviously rubbish as you and I have shown. Same issue with an ice-free Arctic in so many million years too.

  87. WHAT: The world is staring down the barrel of climate change that is faster than at any time in the last 65 million years, says climate expert Chris Field…..

    Really?

    WUWT – On “Trap-Speed”, ACC and the SNR
    January 5, 2011

    http://tinyurl.com/onxy2wq

    Abstract
    Richard B. Alley
    Ice-core evidence of abrupt climate changes

    …..As the world slid into and out of the last ice age, the general cooling and warming trends were punctuated by abrupt changes. Climate shifts up to half as large as the entire difference

    between ice age and modern conditions occurred over hemispheric or broader regions in mere years to decades…….

    http://www.pnas.org/content/97/4/1331.full

    —————–

    Abstract
    Pierre Deschamps et al
    …Our results, based on corals drilled offshore from Tahiti during Integrated Ocean Drilling Project Expedition 310, reveal that the increase in sea level at Tahiti was between 12 and 22 metres,

    with a most probable value between 14 and 18 metres, establishing a significant meltwater contribution from the Southern Hemisphere. This implies that the rate of eustatic sea-level rise exceeded

    40 millimetres per year during MWP-1A….

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/nature10902.html

    —————–
    Abstract
    Reef drowning during the last deglaciation: Evidence for catastrophic sea-level rise and ice-sheet collapse
    Elevations and ages of drowned Acropora palmata reefs from the Caribbean-Atlanticregion document three catastrophic, metre-scale sea-level-rise events during the lastdeglaciation…..

    [paper]
    …. Such drowning eventsmust have been truly catastrophic, involv-ing—to our knowledge—the fastest rates of glacio-eustatic sea-level rise yet reported…..The exact duration of the CREs is

    unknown but, given that the mini-mum rate of sea-level rise was >45 mm/yr,the duration of the 14.2 ka event must have been…..

    http://www.academia.edu/200254/Reef_drowning_during_the_last_deglaciation_Evidence_for_catastrophic_sea-level_rise_and_ice-sheet_collapse

  88. “Although the dramatic climate disruptions of the last glacial period have received considerable attention, relatively little has been directed toward climate variability in the Holocene (11,500 cal yr B.P. to the present). Examination of ∼50 globally distributed paleoclimate records reveals as many as six periods of significant rapid climate change during the time periods 9000–8000, 6000–5000, 4200–3800, 3500–2500, 1200–1000, and 600–150 cal yr B.P. Most of the climate change events in these globally distributed records are characterized by polar cooling, tropical aridity, and major atmospheric circulation changes, although in the most recent interval (600–150 cal yr B.P.), polar cooling was accompanied by increased moisture in some parts of the tropics. Several intervals coincide with major disruptions of civilization, illustrating the human significance of Holocene climate variability.”

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033589404000870

Comments are closed.