Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Professor Michael Mann, inventor of the climate Hockey Stick, has just shamelessly shifted the dreaded climate tipping point to 2020.
The Single Shining Hope to Stop Climate Change
Michael E. Mann Apr 09, 2017
Mann is a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University and co-author of The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy.
Science is under attack at the very moment when we need it most. President Donald Trump’s March 28 executive order went much further than simply throwing a lifeline to fossil fuels, as industry-funded congressional climate change–deniers have done in the past. It intentionally blinded the federal government to the impacts of climate change by abolishing an interagency group that measured the cost of carbon to public health and the environment. Now, the government won’t have a coordinated way to account for damages from climate change when assessing the costs and benefits of a particular policy.
With that in mind, Trump should read the landmark “2020” report now published by Mission 2020, a group of experts convened by the former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The report establishes a timeline for how we can ensure a safe and stable climate. We don’t have much time — 2020 is a clear turning point.
…
Read more: http://time.com/4731632/climate-change-2020-trump/
Until recently Mann claimed 2016/17 was a climate tipping point.
Welcome to the Madhouse: Scientist says Trump could destroy the world
FEBRUARY 10, 20175:01PM
A WORLD-leading scientist has warned Donald Trump may signal the end of the world — and Australia could be first to face the catastrophic consequences.
Michael Mann claims Mr Trump’s relationship to “post-truth” politics and “alternative facts” is much more than just embarrassing for the US and has the potential to destroy civilisation.
Sitting in an office at the University of Sydney Business School ahead of his sold-out talk this week, the Penn State professor says one only has to look at the city’s record January temperatures for proof of how dangerous the President’s attitude is.
“He’s building a wall between himself and the evidence of climate change,” Professor Mann told news.com.au. “He waffles, it’s hard to pin down, he says one thing to one audience then another thing to another audience.
…
All these years scientists and the climate community have been trying to identify key climate cycles – sunspots, Milankovitch cycles, ocean cycles, we all missed the obvious.
Climate is clearly driven by US Presidential Election cycles.
Although I have never agreed with Nick Stokes, he says Mann used the term “Turning Point” for 2020, not Tipping Point. I would think that means Mann is saying that by 2020 there will be no need for additional action. Mann is saying that we have done worldwide (just about nothing), is sufficient so that by 2020 there will be no global warming crisis. Its over!
When is the next big leap in his career—–Dancing with the Stars?
Or MSNBC’s chief science correspondent.
We’re all gonna die off before the con men get their comeuppance.
Pushing off doomsday is a convenient way of perpetually postponing any consequences for lousy work, lying and pulling a scam.
It really doesn’t matter what kind of weather or climate passes.
Mann will simply claim whatever happens is expected in a warming world including any temporary cooling trends that can go on for many years.
The line will be, “warming will come back with a deadly surge”.
He’ll have to adjust it some more times, until the cows come home.
Paul Penrose has it right I think. This is all about positioning a claim by the Green Mann and his cohorts that the non-arrival of climatastrophe is down to all those noble activists taking sufficient action to avert the terrible temperature rises that would otherwise have happened. Sceptics all know this is smoke and mirrors but unfortunately the politicians and media won’t let on to the public as they have too much invested in the imminent disaster narrative. Meanwhile new destructive green agendas await for the elect to lead on with the usual stupendous waste and suffering by the powerless poor.
10:10 has turned into 2020. No pressure.
Oh Noes!
http://themetapicture.com/media/funny-Mayan-calendar-scientist-Twinkies.jpg
Most of the comments below this article from Down Under are from people who know a lot more about the subject than the author. Very little support for Mike Mann.
Michael Mann – The Hal Lindsey of Climate Alarmism.
“Michael Mann – The Hal Lindsey of Climate Alarmism.”
That’s a good, accurate comparison.
You know, it took me years to repress that TV show from my memory, and now with one cavalier choice of a user-name you’ve brought all that cringeworthiness back down on me.
Thanks. 🙂
Mann is trying to channel Harold Camping, too
Hey Mann, you’re an idiot. An alarmist of the worst kind. A smug elitist. I hope your daily life is filled with stress, anger and disappointment on a high level. You deserve it all. I detest you and your lying, manipulating leftists’ ilk!
An election year. I wonder what effect C02 has on the electoral college.
“Now, the government won’t have a coordinated way to account for damages from climate change when assessing the costs and benefits of a particular policy.
With that in mind, Trump should read the landmark “2020” report.”
___
Sayeth Michael Mann.
And Michael Mann. Is a honorable man.
https://youtu.be/zfmAMYYAFzs
John Holdren, star pupil of Paul Erlich, thinks it’s still possible that climate change will kill a million people by 2020. Interesting coincidence.
Michael Mann share a lot with Paul Erlich.
Of course the thing Erlich is most famous for is his failed predictions. link
Come on. Professional predictors of the future do this all the time, irregardless of what title they have. Being a “scientific prognosticator” has no greater chance of being right that your garden variety thereof. When things fail to materialize, just move the goal posts or claim you’ve gotten “new information” and thus the change. That way, you never miss a prediction.
Sheri, first off; “irregardless” is a funny made up word and otherwise I like your writing style and your points
Irregardless is now in WEBSTER’S.
As.
A.
Legit.
Normal.
Word.
Illiteracy is a powerful force that requires making up words when the correct word is not known… And in less than 100 years, POOF! A new word in Webster’s….
Michael Mann is now channelling Harold Camping
Mann admits getting crazy? Publicly? Alright, if his openly hostile conspiracy theory symptoms worsen, madhouse is indeed appropriate.
Mann is admitting getting crazy? That’s progress taking into consideration the depth of his doomsday & conspiracy theories.
I love his use of “alternative facts” so self assured that it his foes use them when in reality he is the generator of “alternative facts”
Any bets that the goal posts will eventually be moved out beyond 2020? Odds say yes
For once Mann may be right. I also think that 2020 will be a clear turning point, but not towards warming.
The poor Ozzies don’t need any more brainwashing on climate change. They have the highest number of sold out ‘scientists’ per capita in the world it seems. Maybe with the next elections when they are asked to bring their flashlights to the polling booth to be able to see the ballot, they will start to question the fools they are voting in. Jo Nova should run for office nationally once the electorate has had enough and put a coffin nail into this destruction of a wonderful country.
Global warming will stop before 2020 providing governments stop paying
for it . Availability of government grants , loan guarantees , subsidies , carbon taxes ,
and crooked politicians undermining real science are the main sources of one of the largest frauds in history . UN globalists seeking a cause , global warming con men and a morally bankrupt media all play a part but it goes no where without government fleecing tax payers to fund the scam .
Britain will bail , Japan already has and the USA is the straw that finished off what remains of unscientific hocus pocus fraud .
The ring leaders are going to be in jail or just dying off .
The ‘Hockey Monkey’ ad at the bottom was just the icing on the cake. Poor Mann, so wrong and so angry.
The reality is that the previous interglacial period, the Eemian, was warmer than this one with higher sea levels and more ice cap melting yet no tipping point ever happened. In the past, CO2 levels have been more than 10 times what they are today yet no tipping points ever happened.
I believe that Mankind’s burning up the Earth’s fossil fuel resources just as quickly as possible is not such a good idea and I would like to use AGW as another reason to conserve but the AGW conjecture is just too full of holes to defend. Central to the AGW conjecture is the idea that the surface of the earth is kept warm because of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases with LWIR absorption bands but there are a number of problems with this concept.
1. The primary means of heat energy transport up and out of the troposphere is by conduction, convection, and phase change and not by LWIR absorption band absorption and radiation. A good absorber is also a good radiator so the so called greenhouse gases do not trap heat energy because of their LWIR absorption bands. Actually the non-greenhouse gases are better at trapping heat energy then the greenhouse gases because the non-greenhouse gases are such poor radiatiors to space and thy do absorb heat energy via conduction and convection. So contrary to the AGW conjecture. the so called greenhouse gasses do not trap heat.
2. A real greenhouse does not stay warm because of the action of heat trapping trace gases. A real greenhouse stays warm because the glass reduces cooling by convection. The process constitutes a convective greenhouse effect. So too on Earth. As derived from first principals, the Earth’s surface is on average 33 degrees C warmer than it would be otherwise because gravity reduces cooling by convection. 33 degrees C is what has been calculated and 33 degrees C is what has been observed There is no additional radiant greenhouse effect. The convective greenhouse effect which is a function of gravity, the heat capacity of the atmopshere and the depth of the atmosphere has been observed on all planets in the solar system with thick atmospheres. The radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed on Earth or anywhere in the solar system. The radiant greenhouse effect is fiction, hence the AGW conjecture which is based on the radiant greenhouse effect is also fiction.
3, For those who still believe that a radiant greenhouse effect may still exist despite the lack of evidence, the original calculations of the radiametric effets of CO2 came up with a Planck climate sensivity of CO2, that is without feedbacks, 0f 1.2 degrees C. To make the global warming effects of CO2 seem substantial, the AGW conjecture factors in a positive feedback caused by H2O that provides an amplification by a factor of 3, yielding a climate sensivity of CO2 of roughly 3.6 degrees C. The IPCC is not really sure about the feedbacks so instead of publishing a single value for the climate sensivity of CO2, they have published a wide variety of possible values for the climate sensivity of CO2 as well as entertain a plethora of different climate models. After more than two decades of effort, the IPCC has been unable to narrow the range of their guesses one iota. They have not been able to measure it and they really do not know what the climate sensivity of CO2 really is.
A researcher has found that the original calculations are too great by more than a factor of 20 because the calculations neglected to include the effect that doubling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause the dry lapse rate in the troposphere to decrease which is a cooling effect. So the Planck climate sensitivity of CO2 should be less than .06 degrees C.
H2O is the primary greenhouse gas in the Earth’s atmosphere but it is also a major net collant as evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate is significantly less than the dry lapse rate. So rather than provide a positive feedback, H2O provides a negative feedback and amplifies the warming effect of CO2 by lets say .3 yielding a climate sensivity of CO2 of .02 degrees C which is very insignificant. For the Earth’s climate to have been stable enough for life to evolve the H2O feedback has had to be negative. If the feedback were actually positive then the global warming effect of H2O would feedback upon itself causing more and more warming until the oceans boiled away and the Earth’s atmosphere became more massive than the atmosphere of Venus.
4. The IPCC models that include CO2 caused global warming have all been wrong in their predictions. They have predicted warming that has not happened. Yet others have produced models that do not include any CO2 based warming, that have been able to reasonably predict today’s global temperatures. From the results of these modeling efforts one can conclude that the climate change we are experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans and has nothing to do with CO2.
.
.
.
My lack of belief in the AGW conjecture is a matter of science.
In the Cambrian, CO2 was about 18 times higher than now, with the sun only less than 5% weaker. No tipping point.
In the Ordovician, CO2 was over 11 times higher than now, with the sun only less than 4% weaker than now. There was an ice age.
Jabber of tipping points, runaway heating and the “Venus Express” are beyond ridiculous.
There is no evidence in the paleoclimate record that CO2 has any effect on climate. In the last million years there is evidence that warmer temperatures cause more CO2 to enter the atmosphere. It is well known that warmer water cannot hold as much CO2 as cooler water. But there is no evidence that CO2 adds to the warming.
Even if I had the time to do it, I don’t have the skills.
Since they keep “moving the goal post’, maybe somebody out there can come up with a graphic.
An American football field, 100 yards long with goal posts. At the right goal would a line to a link below it to the earliest CAGW “doom and gloom” prediction. Add a yard for each year, with a line to a link, that “moved the goalpost”.
I suspect that the unfortunate team on offence would have to cover a mile or more before they could even score a field goal!
@Forrest Gardener
Damn, that good ole’ Scientific method quoted once again.
Meanwhile, the alarmists have Trumped it for decades, with politics. And now Trump can reverse his political position on climate change as quickly as he did on Syria.
So where the ferk is science left in all this?
I can’t put this any other way other than brutally, as distasteful as it is, but we sceptics have to get our heads out our arses and begin to understand that the climate debate is not predicated on science, it exists on a political level.
We are losing, and will continue to lose the debate, unless we operate on the same level as the alarmists.
Frankly, f^ck the science, lets get stuck into the debate.
+1 Many on this site…. some rarely participate because of it…. believe there is no room for debate in science. They’re right but unfortunately they don’t realize it’s not science in the CAGW that’s being debated. It’s the non science.