meteorologist Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=54505 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbutts Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 http://www.ipsnews.n...sp?idnews=54505 The planet is currently 0.8 degrees C hotter from the burning of fossil fuels. However, global temperatures had not yet started to increase in 1951, the first year of rainfall data Zwiers and Xuebin examined. By 1999, global temperatures had climbed by about 0.6 degrees C. The average temperature increase over that 50-year period is relatively small compared to the present but major impacts have been documented in terms of storm and flood damage even with this small increase in temperatures.... they've found the "smoking gun" .... "We simulated a parallel world in which there were no greenhouse gas emissions," said lead researcher Pardeep Pall of Oxford University. .... "We can do this by using and improving the technologies that are already at hand," said Manon Janssen, CEO of Ecofys. "It is a business opportunity, as much as it is a technological challenge." So suddenly a 50 year run on some ensemble is dead nuts accurate with no margin of error and it just happens to support a fantastic business opportunity. Not skeptical at all, this is it guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 1. Global temperatures had not yet started to increase in 1951, the first year of the study.... That is false. Global temperatures have been rising since the mid/late1800s, and there was a fairly rapid rise from the 1910s to the 1940s. 1951 was a cooler point coming after the PDO phase change and a multi-year Nina dropped temperatures somewhat. As most of us know, temperatures began to rise again in the mid/late 1970s once the next +PDO phase rolled around. 2. Extreme precipitation and flooding over the entire northern hemisphere increased by seven percent between 1951 and 1999. According to skiierinvermont, our precipitation network lacks enough data to derive meaningful trends. This would have to apply to this study as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 This study is full of loopholes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Hmmm..... I'm curious as to how much green-energy and grant funding this took to pull off this many lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.