From the Carnegie Institution and the department of feelings, quite possibly the dumbest press release about climate I’ve ever seen. basically what they are arguing for is “don’t look at current and past data go with what we tell you” aka trust us, we are paid climate scientists with a model.
Climate change: Don’t wait until you can feel it
Washington, D.C.— Despite overwhelming scientific evidence for the impending dangers of human-made climate change, policy decisions leading to substantial emissions reduction have been slow. New work from Carnegie’s Katharine Ricke and Ken Caldeira focuses on the intersection between personal and global impacts. They find that even as extreme weather events influence those who experience them to support policy to address climate change, waiting for the majority of people to live through such conditions firsthand could delay meaningful action by decades. Their findings are published by Nature Climate Change.
Nearly every year, extreme weather events such as heat waves and hurricanes spur the discussion of climate change in the media and among politicians. This can create a window of opportunity for those seeking to enact policy aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But this window of opportunity could be delayed by decades due to the vagaries of weather.
“When support for doing something about climate change is based on personal observations of local weather, policymaking may end up being dictated by the roulette wheel of natural climate variability,” says Ricke.
Ricke and Calderia’s modeling studies show that within 50 years nearly every country in the world will experience the kind of extreme weather that can be a policy trigger. However, local natural variability in weather means that majority of people in each nation, particularly large countries like China and the United States, could personally experience these extremes for themselves either tomorrow or many years from now. If citizens do not support emissions reductions and other efforts to fight climate change until they experience extreme events firsthand, naturally-driven variations in weather could delay action by decades, Ricke and Caldeira found. They find that sound science should guide policy rather than the vagaries of weather. “Local weather is anecdotal information, but climate change is sound science,” Caldeira said. “Good politics can be based on a good anecdote, but good policy needs to be based on sound science.”
Wouldn’t we have to experience “extreme” conditions over several years before those conditions could be reliably associated with a change in climate? Even highly variable temperatures are evidence of nothing changing from previous history. Denken Sie nicht für sich selbst, wird es nur geben Sie Kopfschmerzen
“If citizens do not support emissions reductions and other efforts to fight climate change until they experience extreme events firsthand, naturally-driven variations in weather could delay action by decades”
I have experienced some extreme weather events and I still don’t support emissions reductions and other efforts to fight climate change.
In the end, their efforts will be about as successful as spitting upwind during a hurricane.
A big dilemma faced by anyone who is in a flooded hurricane aftermath – whether to run a small generator or whether to tip the petrol back into the ground to ‘save the planet’.
I am sure many have struggled long and hard with that one…
And just how is wavering warmist supposed to “act”?
Add their voices to the other believers at the local jumble sale basket waving booth? Join a CAGW congregation? Tell their elected representative it is OK to keep throwing their tax money at this folly? Pity help the brotherhood if they were to “act” by performing a little independent research and becoming aware that the entire CAGW epistle is a political crock… Please advise…
Models, all the way down…
I felt cold.
From: http://carnegiescience.edu/about/financial
The Carnegie Institution is an endowed, independent, nonprofit institution. Significant additional support comes from federal grants and private donations.
My bold. I wish I did not have to help pay for this –-
http://lighthousepasco.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/dog-poop1.jpg?w=480&h=333
The desperation of the left is palatable…
I love this quote, “This can create a window of opportunity for those seeking to enact policy aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But this window of opportunity could be delayed by decades due to the vagaries of weather.”
“Vagaries of the weather,,” is political NEWSPEAK for: Since the empirical evidence already totally disconfirms the CAGW hypothesis, we’d better act now before to overwhelming evidence against CAGW gets even more overwhelming…. Jeez…
Even the IPCC freely admitted in AR5 that there hasn’t been ANY statistically significant increase in the severe weather over the past 50~100 years. Here are some direct quotes from AR5 on the subject:
“The statement about the absence of trends in impacts attributable to natural or anthropogenic climate change holds for tropical and extratropical storms and tornados”
“The absence of an attributable climate change signal in losses also holds for flood losses”
“There is limited evidence of changes in extremes associated with other climate variables since the mid-20th century”
“Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century.”
“No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin”
“In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”
“In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms.”
“In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century.”
“AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated.”
“In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extratropical cyclones since 1900 is low”
So basically, Carnegie’s Katharine Ricke and Ken Caldeira are saying don’t trust your own eyes and don’t trust the empirical evidence which proves CAGW doesn’t work, trust political hacks that are robbing you blind on CAGW hypothetical model projections that has been proven to be wrong based on disconfirmed hypothetical assumptions that don’t work…
Got it….
This is a climate change propaganda and behavior modification paper. It is a study in indoctrination and how to use it to skew public policy. It is already embedded in the ‘millennials generation’.
Here’s a graph from the paper, which claims it could take from 10 [min] to 25 [median] to 50+ [max] years until the US reaches the “tipping point” when 50% of the country is convinced to support an international climate agreement.
I just left this comment. THIS is the type of thing I am trying to, even though it is just one person. Addressing these articles with an ORGANIZATION as Anthony did a poll one might help. But until then, this is what I can do.
YOUR STUPID article of “Climate Change: don’t wait until you can feel it.
Please stop with this “Alarmist Drivel”. A modeling study? Why not take REAL weather data. I have researched the ‘Catastrophic Global Warming issue for a number of years now, and I am tired of the ‘alarmist’ position that so many of yo take. The ‘Extreme weather ‘ you try to refer to IS NOT HAPPENING AT ANY GREATER RATE than it ALWAYS happened. Global average temperatures have been roughly flat for 15+ years, even WITH the increase CO2.
Read Roger Pielke JR. and Roger Pielke Sr. Visit Dr. Judith Curry’s Website. Visit Anthony Watts’ webiste.
You don’t know them? Yeah, I bet you don’t. BUT if you really don’t, then Google them and learn.
AND I WOULD LIKE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT YOU HAVE READ THIS. Ref. my e-mail address above.
Martin C.
Gilbert, AZ
Perhaps you mean “palpable”?
It must have been wonderful to live in olden times when there was no extreme weather, only gentle spring rains and refreshing zephyrs to cool the summer afternoons!
YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE US NOW!
Later will not help as it will be too late. AS everyone will know it is all a lie. Right now the people are beginning to realize there is a question as to the validity of AGW, soon it will be impossible to keep this leaky balloon up. pg
“When support for doing something about climate change is based on personal observations of local weather, policymaking may end up being dictated by the roulette wheel of natural climate variability,” Um – that’s what climate change IS for the most part *SMH*
@ Jeff Alberts:
No, no… their desperation really does taste good! 😉
So Climate alarmists needs behavior “science” today when their five minuits in spotlights have gone…
“When support for doing something about climate change is based on personal observations of local weather, policymaking may end up being dictated by the roulette wheel of natural climate variability,” says Ricke.
—
It never ceases to amaze me how these alarmist will make use of “natural climate variability” when it helps them but dismiss it when it doesn’t. Any natural climate variability that is powerful enough to mask warming for the past 17 years is also powerful enough to cause most of the warming that occurred in the previous two decades. But don’t rely on “personal observations,” they tell us. Who are you going to believe, the models or your lying eyes?
If I must choose between trusting them with my money to prevent climate change or keeping my money and using it to help me adapt to climate change if necessary, it’s an easy choice. I don’t trust them to do anything other than pretend to take action while lining their own pockets.
Nice to see Caldeira agrees there’s no climate change to speak of out there so he needs to concoct desperation 8-D
Sent Caldeira an email about the futility of his position. Will be interesting to see his response.
*********************************************
Sorry Ken but your latest report won’t fly.
Try doing some actual research for yourself and stop spouting what your grant-money providers dictate.
Sound science would tell you that all the hype about “extreme weather” is purely BS.
At what point in your life will you take a stand that differs with your salary? I took that step in 2005 when I shut down my MEP design office, and have had an uphill battle since. I live paycheck-to-paycheck, trying to make people understand that simple resource conservation matters, on an economical basis.
We have no control over our climate…
Brad Weaver, PE
Northwest Energy Consulting
(206) 910-9783
Utter bullshit. China is an authoritarian state, led by communist bureaucrats. There are not even citizens there, just subjects, therefore what’s supported by the “majority” mattes not. The US, on the other hand, is still a bit different, because a Constitution is supposed to be in effect there. That tiny detail does make a difference, gives priority to people’s personal experience over bureaucratic power. That’s what seems to bother Ricke and Caldeira, sadly. A wise &. benevolent bureaucracy based on “science” is a pipe dream, in reality, with no checks and balances, it always submerges into corruption.
The net result is, actual air pollution, not CO₂, but stuff making people sick right now, which is quite some personal experience, is 8 times higher in China than in the US of A.
I am feeling climate change now. As the earth tilts away from the sun in the southern hemisphere and moves further away in it’s orbit, I feel the climate changing to it’s cool phase usually called winter.
Oh, dear, oh, dear, there’s yet another appearance by the famous “overwhelming scientific evidence”. Funny how it never ever appears in public. Its reality seems to be on about the same level as the reality in a “reality” TV show.
And Carnegie was an honourable man, by the standards of the hyper-rich. If he’d known what degeneracy his name would be attached to, I wonder whether he would have left his fortune to quite such an institution.
Because the sun runs intensively in the zone ozone (UV and cosmic rays) should observe what happens in the stratosphere. You can see that the temperature in the upper stratosphere (south) is currently below normal. However, lately pressure over the South Pole has increased because of the weak vortex. I believe that this is due to jumps of cosmic radiation that affects the decomposition of ozone.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_ANOM_AMJ_SH_2014.gif
http://oi57.tinypic.com/2iv1dlx.jpg
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/intraseasonal/z200anim.gif
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/blocking/real_time_sh/500gz_anomalies_sh.gif
Hilarious – they’re basically saying their nonsense predictions are likely to be once in a lifetime for most people, yet we have to divert tremendous resources to “addressing” the issue? What a bunch of idiots.
I’m glad they find that sound science should guide policy.
Now all they need to do is look at the science.
They can start by reading WUWT.
reminds me of this:
16 April: NYT Dot Earth: Psychology: Andrew C. Revkin: A Risk Analyst Explains Why Climate Change Risk Misperception Doesn’t Necessarily Matter
David Ropeik, risk communication consultant and author of “How Risky is it, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Always Match the Facts”: But this brings me to the second and more profound issue. Most climate change communication, like Showtime’s Years of Living Dangerously and the American Academy for the Advancement of Science’s What We Know campaign, websites like Climate Central and Real Climate, or academic programs like Yale’s Project on Climate Change Communication and George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication, is predicated on the belief that if people know the facts about climate change and finally understand just how serious the problem is, they will surely raise their voices and demand that our governments and business leaders DO SOMETHING!
But I’m just not sure how much public concern matters. I don’t know how much we need to care how much people care…
Those policy makers, our leaders, are going to have to act, even without a huge public mandate…
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/a-risk-analyst-explains-why-climate-change-risk-misperception-doesnt-necessarily-matter/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog Main&contentCollection=psychology&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
Curious about the following in relation to ‘modelling studies’ of impending doom.
In a classical experiment I presume you could determine a causal relationship between x and y by observing what happens to the dependent variable, x (say temperature) when you make changes to the independent variable, y (say, CO2). You would also need to control other variables, z (z1, z2, …) that could influence the relationship between x and y.
Now, I assume a climate model does something like the classical experiment I have outlined above, but with assumed parameters (i.e. there is an assumed relationship between x and y etc.).
Now, where a model fails to match empirical observations and someone says, some variable z (‘aerosols’ or ‘black soot’) are repressing the relationship between x and y (i.e. although there has been an ‘exponential’ increase in co2 it’s not warming because aerosols are causing cooling, etc.), on what basis is an appropriate value for z determined? Is the value given to z basically just a fudge factor to suppress the supposedly known effect of the xy relationship and explain away the failure of the model to match reality?
Prediction based on the past. Everyone has experienced extreme weather events (i.e. variations from the norm for that time of year) during their lives, and they will continue to do so!! That’s why the weather is such a regular topic of conversation – too hot, too cold, too wet, too dry, too windy.
They find that sound science should guide policy rather than the vagaries of weather.
What’s not to like about that? Unfortunately (for them) it does rule out pretty much everything that Mann, Gleick, Jones etc. (you know, all the usual suspects) have ever said or done on the matter of ‘climate change’.
When any of these people actually do any sound science, maybe I’ll start listening. Until then …
Below are a few surprising views!
Lord Jim Apr 26 1:02am asks “Is the value given to z basically just a fudge factor to suppress the supposedly known effect of the xy relationship and explain away the failure of the model to match reality?. Yes. It’s the usual circular logic.
You could apply the same reasoning to between 1900 to 1950. It may not have triggered policy but the extremes were there. Here are two compilations of extreme weather events for 1935 and 1936. Imagine if 2014 and 2015 had those events? Policy makers would be giving birth to kittens.
People looked out the window for promised milder winters and could not feel it. People have decided to roll their eyes and get on with their lives. Wake me up when there is observed evidence in the peer review of global weather getting more extreme (trends) over the last 30 years at least. Bad weather is just bad weather.
@Jeff Alberts:
” SAMURAI says:
April 25, 2014 at 9:57 pm
The desperation of the left is palatable…”
“Perhaps you mean “palpable?”
True, but their desperation is tasty too…
These kinds of press releases are targeted to the under-thirty crowd. What do they know. Their whole lives they’ve been told every hurricane, every tornado, every drought, every flood is unprecedented and confirmation of AGW. Of course if one has paid attention for the last 60 years, you know it is business as usual. And then if you just do a little bit of research, you understand this kind of press release is pure bunk.
Well in Australia a few years of drought did trigger a policy – a policy of building desalination plants. Then Australia received Biblical floods, leading to the mothballing of those desal plants and the wasting of billions of Dollars. Australia has always been a land of extremes with several climate zones.
Unprecedented, “Biblical” Floods Inundate Australia
“Fourth desal plant mothballed. Billions more wasted”
The more stable the environment, the more emotional AGW reactions become. It’s tempting to analyze the climate change curves with the classic change curve http://agileinc.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/changecurve21.jpg.
I FEEL COLD !!!!
Talking about desperation, how about a Bollywood version of ‘years of living dangerously’? http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/24/bollywood-stars-highlight-climate-change-during-first-u-s-awards-ceremony/. Bob’s Burgers may extend global with reruns and all.
When I went to indoctrination studies in the 70’s, (otherwise known as school) the next ice-age was coming. I now tell the current youth about that and tell them they are not to be blamed for that. They are not to be blamed for warming either. It pleases them to know this. 😛
They keep coming back.
I’m like Patrick up there at 11:45 pm.
I can Feel Climate Change coming on right here and now.
It’s getting colder outside even from where I sit in front of this computer whereas only some 3 months ago it use to be quite warm out there at this time of the day.
Dang climate is changing all over again just like it has for every one of my 76 years.
Always around this time of the year it gets colder and then global warming sets in and it gets all hot and bothered all over again a few months later.
Dang Climate just can’t make up it’s mind at all.
There just has to be a climate models somewhere that will be able to tell us how to stop this damn climate jiggling all about and force it to settle down and make up it’s mind what it wants to do.
Maybe all those very, very clever Climate Scientists [ must use Capitals for these “Very Important Persons” ] with all their incredibly precise climate models will be able to work out what is wrong with my darn climate around here and convince it to make up it’s mind if it wants to be hot or cold or whatever and then stick to it..
After all they are “CLIMATE SCIENTISTS” and they have promoted the understanding that they and their science are not subject to the usual Laws of Nature that all the other businesses and the pursuit of riches by us humble working folk are.
And that the Climate scientists abilities of prophecy and their precise prescription for the right turning of the Climate Control Knob to give us the exact climate we desire should be, if we believe their own high opinion of themselves, quite within their capabilities of prediction and prescription.
[ The Somalis can go jump if they want it cooler and the Eskimos can do likewise if they want it warmer although I side with the Eskimos if those clever, clever Climate Scientists really want to know how us humble folk with all our lavish oblations to Climate Scientists feel down here at the foot of the towering ivory Climate Science totem pole.
Mike Jonas says:
April 26, 2014 at 1:48 am
Lord Jim Apr 26 1:02am asks “Is the value given to z basically just a fudge factor to suppress the supposedly known effect of the xy relationship and explain away the failure of the model to match reality?. Yes. It’s the usual circular logic.
—————————————————-
Thanks for the response. Not only is it circular, it is also unfalsifiable.
This is what an expensive science education at Carnegie Mellon, Harvard and MIT can do to your ability to think and speak clearly:
“We did an analysis in which deterministic citizens respond to a stochastic world that’s represented by global climate model projections. We analysed output from a large climate model ensemble and looked at how experiences with extreme temperature events might effect the timing of strong climate policy action. The social system in our analytic model is completely deterministic so the only differences between different simulation ensemble members are small perturbations in initial conditions of the simulation.”
“In science there is a dictum: don’t add an experiment to an experiment. Don’t make things unnecessarily complicated. In writing fiction, the more fantastic the tale, the plainer the prose should be. Don’t ask your readers to admire your words when you want them to believe your story.”
Ben Bova
Jeff Alberts says:
April 25, 2014 at 10:30 pm
SAMURAI says:
April 25, 2014 at 9:57 pm
The desperation of the left is palatable…
Perhaps you mean “palpable”?
================================================
The alarmist forcing us to eat modeled Crap is never palatable..
And yes, the control agenda falling apart has them in a frenzy which is very palpable..
SO I guess you are both right… 🙂
How convenient. There’s no time to wait for proof of their predicitions.
Important to counter this propaganda by pointing out that extreme weather is not new, most older people know this already, not so much youngsters brought up in front of computer screens.
We’re stubborn, us Aussies. The Victorian inferno of 1851 (probably world history’s biggest) and the drought of the late 1830s which actually dried the Murrumbidgee couldn’t convince us. The horror El Ninos around 1790 were soon forgotten. Would you believe the Murrumbidgee flooded catastrophically in 1853, and the local aborigines said there had once been a flood eighteen feet higher…and we put it out of our minds. We had the world’s highest recognised storm surge from Cyclone Mahina in 1899…and we still weren’t convinced about climate change. And that was almost in the 20th century!
You see, lacking the advice of luminaries from the Carnegie (such a cool institutional name) us doofus Aussies have been putting all this stuff down to “the roulette wheel of natural climate variability”. How dumb are we. No wonder those “windows of opportunity” snap shut so quickly. But if our Green Betters persist with the neologisms and management-speak and academese, maybe something will sink in.
I think it’s really sad how we all just keep banging our heads against a wall all the time against this stuff. They get the oxygen of publicity whatever rubbish and scaremongering they put out and the more scary the better. It’s time we could get some real publicity to fight this dogma, what we need is adverts in papers telling people the facts not this rubbish.
I believe if everyone one who is sceptical about the IPPC and all the hanger on’s who promote this rubbish were subjected to some real Analysis then maybe they would have to be more careful in the future. What we need is an organisation who we as sceptic’s donate some money to so they can pay to have advertising which told people how the temp hasn’t gone up, what rubbish the hockey stick was, tell them how little CO2 is in the atmosphere, show them graphs to see we are coming out of an ice age.
If we just keep banging our heads against a wall while they don’t debate the subject and keep telling us more and more scary storey’s then I don’t think we will ever end this Scam.
I also believe if companies were convinced that there electric bills could be reduced if this green dogma was pulled back they might support the campaign as well.
I believe if we all pulled together it would have a real impact.
Here’s hoping one day this could happen imagine if they were forced to debate they would be S****** themselves, here’s hoping.
Caldeira has a track record on scares, he is one of the originators of the “Acid Oceans” hype:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/acid_seas.html
Jimbo says:
April 26, 2014 at 2:13 am
Unprecedented, “Biblical” Floods Inundate Australia.
My reaction to that one is B***S***.
The ignorance of the uninformed is showing and it is so bloody obvious.
That “ignorance” reference most definitely does not apply to you Jimbo.
The 1956 floods here in southern eastern Australia were a couple of metres higher than any flood since in the Murray Darling basin and were the result of, to quote from the Wiki “1956 Murray River floods ” entry.
______________
“The flood occurred due to higher than average rainfalls in Western Queensland and heavy rains in the proceeding three months in Murray catchment areas,[2] peaking at 12.3 metres at Morgan, South Australia.[2] Some areas were flooded up to 100 km from the natural flow of the river.
The flood was and still is considered the biggest flood in the recorded history of the River Murray and described as “the greatest catastrophe in South Australia’s history”.
____________________
&
http://www.samemory.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=1416
That was one heck of a flood as I can testify as I was chasing some skirt over in the South Australian Murray Bridge area at the time. [ no luck darn it ! ] and had a few days up and down the river to see the scale of the flooding.
But now it gets interesting for the proponents of extreme weather and for students of paleo events history.
That 1956 flood, immense as it was, was a bit of a tiddler compared to a flood around the 1750 or about 38 years before Capt Arthur Phillips “First Fleet” landed at Sydney Cove on the 26th January 1788.
The Murray River flood of around 1750 which has been researched by Uni of South Australia students was about twice the size in water volume compared to the so far unmatched during white settlement by a very long ways, colossal 1956 Murray River flood.
The 1750 flood
From ; http://w3.unisa.edu.au/news/media2002/130902.htm
“the palaeoflood reached a maximum height on the River Murray at Overland Corner of 18.01 metres, making it greater than the largest flood on record, rising 2.11 metres above the 1956 flood height”
“Having measured the cross-section of the river, they applied the Manning Equation to determine the discharge of the prehistoric flood. This was estimated to be 7,686 cubic metres per second, almost double the discharge of the 1956 flood, which measured 3,950 cubic metres per second,” Professor Bourman said.”
So the predictors of the catastrophic climate extremes really should be aware of their level of total ignorance of past weather events and and known paleo weather created events BEFORE they start making totally unsupported and ultimately completely wrong, misleading and incorrect allegations of extreme weather occurring due to their completely unproven, supposed and claimed human influences on the global climate.
We had an old rural saying;
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
To paraphase for the climate catastrophists.
You can lead a climate catastrophists to the truth but like that obstinate horse, you can’t make them believe that truth
.
“ROM says:
April 26, 2014 at 4:02 am”
You have to remember the fact that in the MSM, if the story is more than 30 sec’s old, it has no legs (Is a /srac off needed?). I see people (Dead people?) all the time wandering around like zombies here in Sydney, Australia, gawping into their smart phones!! If only they took time to spend some hours in a library to find real historical information. Books, at one time, were the source of truth outside the control of “the church”. Seems we’ve lost the desire for truth but in desperate “need” for a “fix”!
Jimbo says:
April 26, 2014 at 1:41 am
Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.
But without the computing capacity of a well-equipped national meteorological office, heavily model-dependent services such as event attribution and seasonal prediction are unlikely to be as reliable.
====================
It’s not the programmers’ fault, it’s the hardware’s fault.
One thing that’s guaranteed:
“….. overwhelming scientific evidence …..”
Whenever you read that, you know there won’t be any.
Eric Worrall says:
April 26, 2014 at 12:43 am
Hilarious – they’re basically saying their nonsense predictions are likely to be once in a lifetime for most people, yet we have to divert tremendous resources to “addressing” the issue? What a bunch of idiots.
=====================
That’s what I was thinking. Kenny seems to be saying that Climate Change™ will cause the average person to see an “extreme weather event” every 50 years, which is a REDUCTION from what we see now. I guess ‘science’ isn’t supposed to be read carefully.
“If citizens do not support emissions reductions and other efforts to fight climate change until they experience extreme events first hand, naturally-driven variations in weather could delay action by decades”
Why just delay for decades? Why not aim at centuries of delay, or millenia of delay and save some really big money? Whether the money is spent, or just plain old wasted, the weather and the climate will just ignore us as usual and go ahead with its own programme.
“Don’t believe the observations, but believe the models.” So, the observations are wrong and the models are right.
Even for ‘climate science’ that’s pretty special. That’s been implied for years, but to actually come out and say it.
Classic left wing stuff, where only the theory is important and facts plus practicality are irrelevant.
Maybe, someone noticed the grant troughs are no longer overflowing.
http://www.foxnews.com/weather/2014/04/26/severe-storms-cause-injuries-damage-in-north-carolina/?intcmp=latestnews
Storm in NC. Now Kay Hagan can run on climate change. People in eastern NC will be happy that they won’t have another storm for 50 years.
Anyone doubting that Orwell was more of a prophet than a novelist should read this gem. Our society is crumbling at an astounding rate. History, if there even is such a discipline in the future, will likely portray the Baby Boomers as the generation from Hell. From Hell to Hell.
James Delingpole has a post here linking to a German satire of their Green energy policies portraying Greens as Pentacostals. It’s in German with English subtitles. Jo Nova has a re-post here .
People will back climate change programs when they feel the spirit. Be healed brother!
I’d say whoever wrote this has had plenty big experience advertising. Ugh.
philincalifornia says:
April 26, 2014 at 4:25 am
“One thing that’s guaranteed:
“….. overwhelming scientific evidence …..”
Whenever you read that, you know there won’t be any.”
————————————————————————————————————-
I was thinking the same thing when I read that. They start off with an assumption as if it were fact so everything else that flows from that assumption can be considered just that, an assumption.
Perhaps they should have stated: “despite overwhelming incorrectness of climate models, it’s all we got so we’ll use it ……”
But Dr. John Holdren said we should expect more extreme cold because of global warming………..after extreme cold increased.
Others, including Gore, stated that global warming causes snow storms to produce more snow……….after the snow increased.
Just a few examples of the morphing tactic that assigns blame of all extreme weather to climate change.
We’ll, that one didn’t work, so lets now add a new element. Besides causing every extreme weather event, in places not having extreme weather or during times without extreme weather, it just takes longer but is only a matter of time before extreme weather happens to you and if you wait for your extreme weather to actually happen, it will be too late.
Another classic case of “Never mind the facts, look at the theory,” is reported in the GWPF today.
It seems polar bears along Alaska’s Arctic coast are becoming endangered because the ice is too thick, which is the exact opposite of alarmist theory.
Also, some alarmists are admitting that polar bears are capable of moving out of the area where they are being counted.
Berényi Péter says:
That’s a clear and succinct way to make this point. I’ve struggled with explaining this before, the difference between China and Western democracies. Thanks, I’ll remember it.
“Ricke and Calderia’s modeling studies show that within 50 years nearly every country in the world will experience the kind of extreme weather that can be a policy trigger. ”
Funny, They admit natural variation yet still want to kill the US economy… Their model is garbage and yet they persist… They have no facts yet they persist.. This is a religious movement not a scientific one.
“sound science”?
I think I’m going to have my brain removed just in case there’s a remote possibility I get brain cancer.
Meanwhile, yesterday I read that climate change might not be specifically attributable as the cause of the ice fall that killed all those Sherpas on Mount Everest, but it probably was, and we should expect increasing amounts of ice falls and Sherpa deaths from ice falls on Mount Everest in the future. Quit burning fossil fuels and save the Sherpas!
Ps. Sincere condolences to the survivors of the unfortunate victims.
So Kathy & Kenny, it is already going on 7AM here in California.
So what have YOU BOTH done so far today, to reduce YOUR climate footprint ??
I don’t expect you to do too much; just your fair share.
I’d be happy, if today you would reduce (permanently) your climate footprint by just 0.1%, about the same as the solar cycle TSI amplitude.
Of course, I would expect that what you do (today) when carried through by all seven billion of us, will register in your “model” that led you to this great revelation.
Thank you; from all of us.
“””””……. “Good politics can be based on a good anecdote, but good policy needs to be based on sound science.”…….”””””””
We all agree with you Kathy and Kenny; so why don’t you shut down your computer, and start doing some sound science, instead of playing video Apps on a computer.
My wife was watching a CBS “news” talk show this morning and she alerted me, (I trained her to do this using electric “stimulation” therapy), to a “global warming” reference being made by Dr. Holly Phillips, an allergy doctor they had on claiming the global warming was making allergy season worse. She said, “Because our spring was so delayed this year, many things are blooming up all at once. What should have bloomed over a course of a month is now popping up altogether, so we’re seeing really, really high pollen levels.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/allergies-expert-shares-how-long-winter-climate-change-may-affect-symptoms-this-season/
It would be my guess that though warmer conditions could in fact shift the allergy season a day or so earlier on average, that it is the higher CO2 concentration itself that is directly responsible for any increase in pollen. That is evidence of healthier plant life thus good for all life on the planet. Spin away CBS…
Carbon taxes and emissions trading schemes are fake markets,.
They have the vices of bureaucracy and bribery, and they’ve already proved to be magnets for organised crime and corruption. Even if they had none of those disadvantages, they still would not make any significant reduction in CO2 emissions.
But as long as the majority of alarmists regard Global Warming as less important than their opposition to Nuclear Energy or fracking, I’ll take them at their evaluation that it’s not that important.
I get it. She’s a post doc research scientist; evidently a Physicist.; at an “Institution.”
So that puts her in the 65% of USA PhD Physics graduates who are doomed to never find a permanent job in their field of expertise. Well Carnegie have plenty of money to support otherwise unemployable would be scientists.
Shoulda majored in something useful Kate.
I have to admit, my initial thought was that “quite possibly the dumbest press release about climate I’ve ever seen.” was probably an exaggeration. After reading the article I saw that it wasn’t.
As an aside, I’m sure that all WUWT readers are aware that “Earth Day”, is actually; and was deliberately chosen to be, Vladimir Lenin’s birthday.
Didja know he wrote climate papers, that evidently are now being implemented (finally) in the good old USA. God that on the radio news this morning.
On the scale of self-awareness, this article rates zero. That is quite an achievement for Alarmists.
They find that sound science should guide policy rather than the vagaries of weather. “Local weather is anecdotal information, but climate change is sound science,” Caldeira said. “Good politics can be based on a good anecdote, but good policy needs to be based on sound science.”
Since Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize and Oscar, most discussions of the anecdotes produce much evidence that extreme weather events are not happening as a result of increased CO2, so in that sense science has been winning more and more of the recent discussions that follow disasters. Overall public support for the idea of AGW has declined, as has support for major reductions of CO2 forced by regulations.
If the case for human CO2-induced climate change and increased extremes were more solid (instead of full of holes); and if the case that government-mandated reductions in CO2 would avert disaster were more solid (instead of nearly non-existent), then their advice would be more serious. “Eat before you are hungry; drink before you are thirsty; rest before you are tired,” is common advice in hiking, where it is based on countless experiences. Here, “Act before you can tell whether it makes a difference” is unsound.
“Climate Craziness of the Week: don’t wait to ‘feel’ climate change, act now!”
This is called “talking your book” … or someone else’s book for them.
Sorry, I meant “jumping your shark”.
The problem is that “sound science” disingenuously omits all of the negative feedbacks that reduce the actual effects of CO2 to an acceptably small value.
Don’t wait to go to the Heavens – go right now!
Most shocking of all is the corruption of so many institutions. The intellectual rot is an amazing phenomenon to witness.
Caldeira said. “… good policy needs to be based on sound science.” Another inadvertent and bitter irony, courtesy of yet another climate modeler.
ROM
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink,
You CAN however drown him, but it’s harder than you think.
🙂
I find the desperation not just palatable, but delicious, especially when it’s served with the right amount of irony and just a hint of arrogance! There should be an Iron Chef Science show where three well known Climate Scientists (hat tip caps to ROM) compete to cook up their latest theories and feed them to guest judges who then deliver scathing comments on the results. I’d watch it.
Mike M,
Was going to ask exactly what your “electric stimulation therapy” consisted of, but thought better of it. The hilarious, obvious problem with the news story is that “global warming” kept things colder, longer this year (late spring) ….how they can say it with a straight face is beyond me.
I think the alarmists have accomplished a lot considering all they have is a flawed computer model and a lot of speculation. It takes practice to use the phrase “overwhelming scientific evidence” and keep a straight face.
The top three countries to have experienced extreme weather over the last 20-30 years
1. Honduras
2. Burma
3, Haiti
have all double their population during this period.
Ah i get it a correlation, extreme weather increases the population , the UN predicts the worlds population to increase to 9 billion by 2100.
the no1 industry that relies on good weather,
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/07/farmers_don_t_believe_in_climate_change_but_maybe_that_s_ok.html
“The long-term prediction for the Corn Belt in Iowa says that the weather will get hotter and drier—much like western Kansas is currently. Yet, over the decades of Miller’s farming career, conditions have been increasingly wet. “If I had done what climate alarmists had said to do, I would have done exactly the wrong thing for 20 of the last 25 years,” Miller says”
“Despite overwhelming scientific evidence for the impending dangers of human-made climate change,…”
WTF!!!
I’m still waiting to see some of that “overwhelming scientific evidence”.
Still waiting.
DennisA says:
April 26, 2014 at 3:44 am
Caldeira has a track record on scares, he is one of the originators of the “Acid Oceans” hype …
So has his useful idiot:
It would appear that ‘Nature Climate Change’ will publish just about anything. I’m wondering if I can get an old copy of National Enquirer published as a paper.
Irritable Climate Syndrome could be cured by dusting the atmosphere with Imodium.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
This sounds like the Eco-fraud version of “Who are you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?”
“”””””……Billy Liar says:
April 26, 2014 at 11:48 am
DennisA says:
April 26, 2014 at 3:44 am
Caldeira has a track record on scares, he is one of the originators of the “Acid Oceans” hype …
So has his useful idiot:…..”””””
Say Billy, did you edit her ipad /ped /pid /pod/ pud /whatever, App on Acid Oceans to leave out her graphs of past Acid Oceans data, that matches her App calculations that show the corals running out of rocks to build their castles with.
I’m sure we (she) have experimental data showing showing the monotonic decrease in coral growth, to match the (near) monotonic increase in atmospheric CO2.
Now Warmista Worrywarts, can plead, that cloud feedback is masking the continuous global warming expected from rising atmospheric CO2, so we don’t see it; but nobody can claim that cloud feedback, has somehow put acid oceans on hold.
Henry’s law would dictate that ocean acidity, would track atmospheric CO2, without any cloud masking.
What gives ??
george e. smith says:
April 26, 2014 at 1:02 pm
To tell the truth George, I only watched the first few seconds – I knew it was going to be scary so no need to stress myself by watching it all!
I have now, however. It’s amazing how any scary number is always red in visualisations; and there was plenty of red by the time her ‘Earth System Model’ had run its monotonic course to acidification doom.
Uh, I think we ARE feeling climate change already – the COOLING cycle well underway, as lately expressed in the coldest winter ever in Chicago, and near-coldest ever in thousands of other places in both hemispheres. Tells me, if we don’t want to freeze to death in the near term we’d better be upping those CO2 emissions as fast as we can!
Seriously one wonders why the alarmists can’t recognize the slap in their faces they’re getting from Mother Nature for what it is. What gluttons for punishment they must be!
The double talk of a “Cultist”
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
-Joseph Goebbels
Jim Clarke says: April 26, 2014 at 2:51 pm ” …Joseph Goebbels”
Who of course learned it from “Mein Kampf”:
“All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.”
We gone a long way down this rabbit hole my friends. Most of the players in this scam participated in the US housing scheme. The ideologically useful idiots out to save the world being used by the connected for financial gain. Everybody wins until the music stops. Quoting a rapper “gonna start an escort service for all the right reasons” captures it pretty well.
norah4you says:
April 25, 2014 at 10:53 pm
So Climate alarmists needs behavior “science” today when their five minuits in spotlights have gone…
=============
Minuits? Altitude challenged Alaskans?
What do they expect people to do? Act now? Yes patrick, we are getting milder at night, on the Northern Tablelands, so other than don a jumper we can’t do much else. And remove frost intolerant pot plants inside. You should see my house in winter, like a jungle.
The remark has merit. If an astroid were hurtling toward earth, and we knew about it, we would not wait for it to hit to do something about it. The real issue is the ‘overwhelming scientific evidence’. It’s simply not there.
Charles, it is doubtful if a huge asteroid was hurtling towards earth, we could do anything about it, we are moving through space so fast to calculate would need a genius to change its impact or ground zero. Anyway, let’s hope this never happens for us to be proven wrong. I would imagine it would be like trying to kill a fly with a pea shooter.
“bushbunny says:
April 26, 2014 at 10:37 pm”
A signifigant event will happen. It *IS* inevitable! Question is, when. And can we can do anything to avert it is questionable, I’d say remote.
So, to my surprise, I did get an email response from Ken Caldeira, around 12:30AM. (I admit to riding the edge with my comments, I was interested to see what kind of response I would get. This came from his private gmail address.)
*********************************************************************
Brad,
Do you make a habit of going around insulting people in ways that reveal your ignorance?
I have not been supported by any Federal money since I stopped working for a nuclear weapons lab in 2005.
I have taken unpopular positions such as supporting development and deployment of nuclear power plant and research into geoengineering. I have questioned the utility of creating voluminous IPCC reports.
It is pathetic that in your venality you would think I am motivated by the shallow concerns you suggest. Perhaps you should look inward. I feel sorry for you that you have reached a psychological state where you feel compelled to write such emails
Best,
Ken
_______________
Ken Caldeira
Carnegie Institution for Science
Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
+1 650 704 7212 kcaldeira@carnegiescience.edu
http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab
https://twitter.com/KenCaldeira
Assistant: Dawn Ross
*******************************************************************************
I responded, asking him if he thought we had a “Climate Change” problem, what was causing it, and what are the solutions. I also asked for any links to his comments about nuclear power and IPCC report size. No response, lastly sent him a link to this post.
My favorite line from the old “Top Gun” movie.
“I’m not feeling it Goose!!
I’ve experienced some extreme weather I’ve never experienced in the last 30 years.
Fortunately, I’ve survived over 60 years so I’ve seen it before.
DaveE.
Those born after about 1990 will not have felt climate change, those of us born before then have sufferred greatly from the few 10th’s of a degree increase in temperature over our life time. It is a wonder that we survived!
“Despite overwhelming scientific evidence for the impending dangers of human-made climate change”…
That is a crock. How can ‘evidence’ be something that is “impending”? It hasn’t happened yet!
I think this article by Rieke and Caldeira well illustrate what is wrong with the mainstream climate science . Had they been looking from the start and in more depth into natural variability science which they strangely refer to as “vagaries of weather”, “roulette wheel of natural climate variability” and “anecdotal information” they could have helped society with useful science and information. Instead they now hang their hat on their failed version climate science which they falsely claim as “sound science” despite all the failed predictions which they are pushing on society in an aura of alarmism. Their so called” sound science” serves no useful purpose to society as it has proven to be quite unreliable and wasteful for formulating public policy
Brad says:
April 27, 2014 at 1:30 pm
“[caldeira:] I have not been supported by any Federal money since I stopped working for a nuclear weapons lab in 2005.”
Bolshewikipedia says
“Kenneth Caldeira is an atmospheric scientist who works at the Carnegie Institution for Science’s Department of Global Ecology”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Caldeira
So he must be financed by socialist crony/foundation money or by ballooning student tuitions; riding on the education bubble. Hmm, “Carnegie institution”; okay, so it’s socialist crony foundation.
“[caldeira:] It is pathetic that in your venality you would think I am motivated by the shallow concerns you suggest. Perhaps you should look inward. I feel sorry for you that you have reached a psychological state where you feel compelled to write such emails”
Calling climate skeptics crazy. A Lewandowsky. The cheap out for the typical warmist scare peddler.
“Don’t wait to” feel” climate change , act now.” .I seem to recall that the rule of thumb was that we should wait at least 30 years before we act to see if the current trend was real and that our theories are even valid
Maybe they meant to say, ” Don’t wait to” feel” climate change .,act now and give us still more free money now?