Comments on: Substance trumps style at climate talks Global environmental challenges Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:14:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: dan bloom Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:59:02 +0000 You want to know what I think? I don’t think there will be any agreements. We are careening toward the unimaginable, not at breakneck speed, but slowly, at a snail’s pace, drip by drip, but we are headed for major catastrophe by year 2500. And I will you show what it will look like with pictures here:

But the media doesn’t want to go down this road right now.
I understand.

By: Karl Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:04:18 +0000 snorbertzangox:

You are absolutely right. The America short-range GCM the CFS (Climate Forecast System) showed a very warm March for a vast area of the Central U.S. This area will end March MUCH below average. The data used to generate this model had a cut-off time as late as March 1! Numerical models, for all their 21st Century sophistication cannot accurately model the complexity of our atmosphere-ocean-solar interaction.
With such a dismal one-month forecast how can any rational person accept a 50-to-100 year forecast?

By: snorbertzangox Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:20:56 +0000 Please review recent publications that conclusively demonstrate that carbon dioxide is not the cause of the ongoing climate warming.

Carbon dioxide has increased steadily at approximately 0.4% per year since the dawn of the industrial age. The temperature has increased and decreased sporadically during the same period. The first excuse for the cooling that occurred during the 50s through the late 70s was that sulfate particles were precluding penetration of sunlight into the atmosphere. Yet, some research indicated that particles might actually augment warming.

The excuse now given for the total lack of warming and perhaps some small cooling is that the oceans are absorbing the excess heat. The GCMs do not predict the ongoing cooling Furthermore, recent research has shown that the oceans are not warming, they might even be cooling.

IPCC refuses to address the fact that satellite data plainly demonstrate that the mid troposphere (1 to 10 km altitude) is warming more slowly than the surface, despite the predictions of the GCMs that the troposphere should warm at a rate 2 to 4 times more rapidly than the surface.

The carbon dioxide -induced warming hypothesis has failed all of the tests to which it has been subjected. We must discard the carbon dioxide hypothesis and proceed to research the actual causes of the ongoing warming. Some warming might be caused by land use changes. If you look at the data, you will see that the correlation between a combination of solar output, cosmic rays and the Pacific and Atlantic decadal oscillations correlates much better to climate temperature than does carbon dioxide.

The GCMs do not provide accurate projections of short term climate changes. They cannot provide accurate (or even inaccurate) estimates of what will happen in 100 years. They are worthless.

We as a species have a penchant for self-flagellation, but we need to stop this hysteria before we permanently damage the world economy and doom millions of humans who are living in emerging economies to horrible hardship.

By: Delvin Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:21:54 +0000 I wish the global climate change negotiations can achieve an agreement, all countries should unite to fight the climate change. If not, the environmental disaster will come soon.
But I also recommend a complete method of building a dual currency system in the world, detailed on

By: kopi Thu, 20 Mar 2008 02:31:28 +0000 yes yes