A doubly whammy this week as Gaia author Lovelock rails against windfarms and environmentalists, and climate sensitivity has been scaled back. From Dr. Benny Peiser at The GWPF:
Global warming is likely to be less extreme than claimed, researchers said yesterday. The most likely temperature rise will be 1.9C (3.4F) compared with the 3.5C predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Norwegian study says earlier predictions were based on rapid warming in the Nineties. But Oslo University’s department of geosciences included data since 2000 when temperature rises “levelled off nearly completely”. –John Ingham, Daily Express, 26 January 2013
The Earth’s mean temperature rose sharply during the Nineties. This may have caused us to overestimate climate sensitivity. We are most likely witnessing natural fluctuations in the climate system – changes that can occur over several decades – and which are coming on top of a long-term warming. —-Professor Terje Berntsen, University of Oslo, 24 January 2013
These results are truly sensational. If confirmed by other studies, this could have far-reaching impacts on efforts to achieve the political targets for climate. –Caroline Leck, Stockholm University, 25 January 2013
This research confirms what we have been saying all along. The global warming standstill of the last 16 years is having a dramatic effect on climate models and predictions. The Met Office should now reassess its own, flawed computer models and tone down the alarmist pronouncements which are no longer trustworthy. –The Global Warming Policy Foundation, Daily Express, 26 January 2013
Even the previous IPCC imminent doom scenario completely failed to produce any serious action. With the recent gradual scientific acceptance – even among scientists who have spent their whole lives studying the subject – that global warming is simply much less significant than had been thought, the chance of anyone caring enough to take action is now even lower. — Lewis Page, The Register, 25 January 2013
I am James Lovelock, scientist and author, known as the originator of Gaia theory, a view of the Earth that sees it as a self-regulating entity that keeps the surface environment always fit for life… I am an environmentalist and founder member of the Greens but I bow my head in shame at the thought that our original good intentions should have been so misunderstood and misapplied. We never intended a fundamentalist Green movement that rejected all energy sources other than renewable, nor did we expect the Greens to cast aside our priceless ecological heritage because of their failure to understand that the needs of the Earth are not separable from human needs. We need take care that the spinning windmills do not become like the statues on Easter Island, monuments of a failed civilisation. – Bishop Hill, James Lovelock, 12 December 2012 (in a letter noted by Phillip Bratby)
===============================================================
Related articles
- Team of Ex-NASA Scientists Concludes No Imminent Threat from Man-Made CO2 (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Yet another study shows lower climate sensitivity (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Environmental backpedalling picks up pace (dailymaverick.co.za)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So what becomes of these new estimates if the steady state temps continue for another 5 years? Apparently they will have to downgrade their estimates even more,right?
Every little bit like this helps. After a while critical mass and increasing momentum gather such force that they all will have to fall in line. And then the real work will be ahead. Setting up mental health clinics to counsel those suffering from cognitive dissonance.
They are Statists to a man/woman better suited to life in the USSR of the 1950′s.
As an ordinary citizen or a member of the Politburo?
Better still we should look to the French who have wisely chosen nuclear energy as their principal source; a single nuclear power station provides as much as 3200 large wind turbines.
That would be 3 MW turbines all producing at their peak. If we go for the best average it is 10,000. And if we go with the net (spinning reserves accounted for) it is 160,000 at best.
At January 26, 2013 at 1:59 pm I dropped a decimal point. 3200 is correct for average production and 16,000 would be net.
Look at the comment from the university of Oslo. In the past “scientists” have been telling us they calculated the sensitivity of the earth including feedback factors. They also claimed that they knew the sources of natural variation and the rise being observed was well outside those limits so it had to be due to CO2 – there was no other possible factor. Remember the claims of positive feedback from water vapour, the hot spot in the middle troposphere, the change to less low cloud and more high cloud etc.
This is an admission they simply used the claimed rate of temperature rise, assumed it was all due to rising CO2 (without really having any idea about natural variations their sources or magnitudes) and from that extrapolated an effect 100 years out. This is a total reversal of what they claimed in the past.
They are now conceding that natural variation is at least as large as the impact of CO2 (since it supposedly has cancelled out warming for the last 16 years) but since they have now also admitted they don’t know anything about natural variation and its sources maybe they are still out by a factor of 2 and both the rise 1970 to 1998 plus the stasis 1998 to 2013 are due to natural variation.
This revelation is an admission that the entire scenario, claimed as detailed and reliable science, was simply an extrapolation of short term dodgy data coupled with a totally unwarranted assumption that CO2 was the only significant driver of climate. Their 2 half data sets (1970-1998 and 1998-2013) conflict massively with that assumption since one shows warming and the other doesn’t yet CO2 is rising for both yet still they cling to the assumption.
Actually this is disappointing. All they have really done is curve fitting the model to include the last decade.
They should be using the period prior to 2001 to calibrate their models, and then test them again using the full period thru today. Since the models cannot explain the current period that is a clear indication that fundamental variables or interactions are not included. There are a number of alternative mechanism that have been suggested and poo-poo’ed by the climate change establishment, maybe it is time to finally test some of them by incorporating them into the models and see what happens.
Just a wild guess, but is there a wind farm planned neat Mr Lovelock’s home?
I look at Obama’s speech a little differently than most. To me it sounded like a ploy to keep the useful idiots invested while his rich buddies bail out of the scam. As soon as these 1%ers have all enriched themselves even further I expect Obama to pull the plug and move on to the next scam.
I’m with Nick Luke. Lovelock and his ilk just have simple unsophisticated thoughts – nice but they don’t help humanity improve much.These people think that what they saw as a child is how it should always remain. There is no actual rationale for this. If mankind makes things better – and we has in a lot of ways – why would you like to keep things the way they were. He now recognizes something many of us have known for may years – centralized large scale power generation is really the only way to go. He touched on one other thing, that being the increasing human population of which he is one.
This is nothing to do with recanting..
It is to do with a selfish greenie hypocrit not wanting a wind turbine “in his backyard” !!
[SNIP – sorry Pat, you’ve refused to answer my questions here, and I’m not going to waste any more time on you since you are simply here to promote your own views and website. If you want to go back and answer those questions I put to you some time ago, we can move forward, provided it isn’t just another way for you to drive traffic to your own website. – Anthony]
I have actually read Lovelock’s book on the Gaia Hypothesis. It is a far more sensible book than any description of it that I have ever read. In fact, it is a very interesting book and I heartily recommend it to the people of this website.
Alan Watt, CD (Certified Denialist), Level 7 says:
January 26, 2013 at 1:00 pm
agreed – hence the apologies statement/caveat!
You know, sometimes I get really depressed thinking about just how fecked we are in the the hands of the morons we generally call ‘politicians’. And you know what annoys me the most? – it’s the fact that most really ordinary genuine people could be far better politicians if only they would stand up! Why are politicians so gawdamned corrupt?
answers on a postcard to:
Politicians are worse than lawyers
Don’t waste a bullet on them Anyroad
Fecked up Town
Anycountry
The World
Latitude says:
January 26, 2013 at 7:18 am
knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations
– Barack Obama
==============
History shows that no country, no matter how great, ne can avoid the devastating impact of DEBT.
Generations of children in the US are effectively being sold into slavery by current US economic policies. Climate change pales in comparison.
Beeseman i love your analogy “Mann & Hansen still in th eboiler room …..” hahahaha you made my day Thank You
Lovelock recants.. AGAIN?? I was sure he did this some time ago already.
James Lovelock also recanted on April 25 2012. He stated that the data do not match the theory and global warming has been exaggerated. He also branded Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and Tim Flannery’s “Weather Makers” as alarmism. This was not reported at all in the Australian press. I had the opportunity to confront Mr Flannery directly with James Lovelock’s comments. He did not answer this comment. He seemed pleased that someone had at least read his book. Probably no surprise that January 26 announcement was not reported. Interesting coincidence though, April 25 and January 26 are the 2 Australian public holidays-Anzac Day(equivalent of Veteran’s Day) and Australia Day( the founding of the colony. )
Combine the recanting by the Met office announcing on the sly(Christmas) that there had been no warming for 16 years and it should be game-over for the AGW theory. It takes just ONE significant discrepancy in the data, model or methodology for a theory to be discredited .
There is much more than money continuing the Big Lie. There is the more important issue that carbon taxes will eventually destroy the industry and economies of western nations. In Australia, 10 % of ETS monies go to the United Nations, the biggest proponents of the scam via the IPCC. But what would possess the UN to lie so? For the answer, we must return to the impetus to form the progenitor of the UN, the League of Nations. It was the Fabian Society, a bunch of Socialists with some truly crazy ideals which were/are as crazy as the Nazis. Some of the UN resolutions signed by YOUR governments eg Agenda 21 and UNIDO(aka Lima Declaration) in particular are straight out of these Fabian Utopian ideals.
Realistically, James Lovelock MUST get that message out continuously and broadly to the media across the globe, perhaps with a worldwide tour. He let out the original genie, which has now run amok, so he must lay the genie to rest.
I would absolutely LOVE him to come out to Australia to recant.
Nick Luke has it bang on.
Nick Luke says:
January 26, 2013 at 7:35 am
Surely he has not recanted he has said that what he was aiming for has be subverted and abused.
They make me laugh…..
Well, all facts were confirmed in Science Journal, Eemian interglacial reconstructed from a Greenland folded ice core, Nature Volume: 493, page 489-494 also presented in Greenland’s ice ‘melts in spurts’, BBC.co.uk 2 August 2012
I myself published a lot in this question. Among other FACTS FOR EVERYONE TO BE AWARE OF, even those who believe in the CO-2 threat., Norah4you page 2009 from article 2003
For more information please go to my website.
I am not a scientist. What got my alarm bells ringing was when they started saying, “the debate is over”. Once the atmosphere of the culture of the movement turns absolutist and fundamentalist, you’ve lost the “self correction” so key to science, and the basis for trusting that science. The flat temps might not have happened for other unknown reasons, we could have kept warming for other unknown reasons, and that would have self-confirmed their beliefs.
Josh needs to create some cartoons showing the Easter Island heads with the now missing wind turbines on top and the demise of the Island civilization. Perhaps “propeller” caps.
I’m still confused as to the ‘sensitivity’ of 2X CO2. Since it is acknowledged to be logarithmic and currently we are roughly 40% of the way to a doubling of CO2 from 280ppm. Doesn’t that mean that we have seen roughly 60% of the effect at present? If the IPCC is predicting a 3.5C (6.3F) rise for a 2X CO2, doesn’t that mean that temps should be around 2.5F higher now than they were at 280ppm, yet current temps are only roughly 1F higher than they were at 280ppm? How do they explain that?
Moderator, the link to Pat Ravasio’s site still works and she still uses the d words.