These people have no shame. From The Australian:
THE UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last ’30 to 40 years at least’ to break the long-term global warming trend.
Plain and simple, in his view we will have to wait another fifteen years to see if global warming hysteria is a fraud and a con. Meanwhile, continue to ruin your economies just in case. The harm such people have done is immense. And what does he say to all this:
Overall, Dr Pachauri said, ‘we aren’t doing all that well’ in global attempts to combat climate change.
I would say, instead, that we have done really well since even he agrees that temperatures have stopped rising. What a bag of wind. What a fraud and a con this global warming has been, in exact keeping with all of the other socialist idiocies of the past century or two.
Meanwhile, in a bit of grandiose condescension, in the caption under the picture we read:
Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said in Melbourne yesterday everyone has the right to question science.
Will they gift him the flick at the UN. You must be kidding. He gets to keep his job, travel the world in first class luxury and live in air conditioned hotel suites at our expense.
I don’t ned to wait 15 years to decide whether the Great Golbal Warming Scam is a con. The evidence is alreay in. The science has spoken. We have been hoodwinked. It is a shame that Abbott and his Liberal Greenies do not understand that.
johno
22 Feb 13 at 9:36 am
The ihnorant hairy railway engineer finally admits reality and in almost the same breath advances another preposterous assertion to replace the lies he’s been peddling during the last decade of his jetset lifestyle.
JamesK
22 Feb 13 at 9:39 am
“everyone has the right to question science”
Read between the lines. This implies that it is questioned beyond the realm of science. If the dissent didn’t have a scientific basis, i would not question it. This is a smear akin to labeling sceptics creationists.
The Beer Whisperer
22 Feb 13 at 9:40 am
It’s just staggering that these bedwetters continue the cite the massive, ridiculous conceit that humans can alter the ‘global climate’ in any way, shape or form.
Morons.
Rabz
22 Feb 13 at 9:43 am
I know this smell. This was the attitude of the IOC & FIFA just before the corruption scandals broke.
Token
22 Feb 13 at 9:43 am
So much for the science being settled. Every single person who is currently in authority who made that claim should be sacked or resign immediately.
In another day and age persons who made such colossal mistakes would choose to honourably resign than be held up to public ridicule. It is a mark of how low our institutions have sunk that this currently lot cling on.
Lloyd
22 Feb 13 at 9:48 am
Pachauri is a railroad engineer. His scientific pronouncements need to be considered in that context.
Tapdog
22 Feb 13 at 10:03 am
What a bloody waste of time and money and energy.
Peter
22 Feb 13 at 10:40 am
According to the article in the Australian. Surely melt not growth.
AndrewL
22 Feb 13 at 11:01 am
There is going to be a heavy price to pay as this all unravels over time. There are thousands of students who have tied their careers to the scam, particularly honours and post grads. I know a few personally and have listened to their earnest description of the dreadful impacts of rising seas or temperature on various ecosystems. These people haven’t had the maturity to question what was being fed to them. It’s their supervisors and mentors that are most culpable.
Biota
22 Feb 13 at 11:10 am
Didn’t Gavin of real climate fame say that, if the temps had not mvd by 2013′ that there were real problems with the models? I wish I had saved that link.
Ultimately, as alarmists like to bring up the doctor/cancer scenario, what we are beginning asked to believe is this : despite you cancer being in remission for 17 years, we want you to continue on your monthly chemotherapy. Ignore the sickness and the hair loss, the alternative would be much worse! Oh, and sacrifice the odd goat and chicken, if you can. We haven’t got any evidence to say that needless animal sacrifices don’t ward off cancer, but on the precautinAry principle, you can’t be too sure, and it is just a couple of goats and chickens.
brc
22 Feb 13 at 11:17 am
A railway engineer who once said we should expect more earthquakes from climate change, and has his snout in the climate troth outside of his official role.
Another example of bias in reporting, if Viscount Monckton is the bloke in question they (Age, ABC etc) tell you that he once said he could cure AIDS. They don’t even attempt to tell us the dirt on the warmy favourites. And all Monckton did was say that quarantine early on would have controlled AIDS.
Harold
22 Feb 13 at 11:21 am
Pachauri is a railway engineer, and the A.L.P.’s genius “Climate Commissioner” is a Professor of dinosaur poo!
But then again, the A.L.P. appointed the comically innumerate Wayne Swan as Federal Treasurer, so at least their ‘personnel management’ is consistent.
Up The Workers!
22 Feb 13 at 11:26 am
Dr Patchauri’s credentials in climate change ideally fit him to head the UN response to ASTEROID DOOM FROM DEEP SPACE.
It’s going to happen in the next 100 years – the only thing that can save mankind is a $50 billion investment in a secretariat, peer-reviewed research and international conferences. You know it makes sense.
Dr Faustus
22 Feb 13 at 11:26 am
AndrewL, yes, there is an error in that statement.
They mean the record ice growth this northern
!
eb
22 Feb 13 at 12:38 pm
Yes, eb record growth to a record maximum minimum
!
AndrewL
22 Feb 13 at 1:01 pm
If the UN is put in charge of asteroid defence the human race better party on until a big one arrives. No point in trying.
Calling Pachauri a railway engineer is an insult to all the real ones. You’d find the rails were grifted off in a Pachauri run railroad.
Eyrie
22 Feb 13 at 1:34 pm
Ina Pachuri run railway, trains and rails would be imaginary.
Gab
22 Feb 13 at 1:36 pm
I don’t know what you mean, AndrewL.
In any case, there is more ice now than at the same time last year.
Also, I don’t think this is relevant. Temperatures haven’t increased for 17 years, so any reduction in sea ice is clearly not due to increasing temperatures!
eb
22 Feb 13 at 1:59 pm
Oh Snap!
Adam Diver
22 Feb 13 at 2:13 pm
What reduction in sea ice?
As we speak global (arctic and antartic) sea ice is above the 1979 – 2008 mean by over 100,000 sq kms.
jupes
22 Feb 13 at 2:20 pm
Christopher Monckton, who will be at Newvastle Souths Leagues Club, 26th Feb at 7.30pm, gives this Pachuri bullshit the treatment it deserves and the treatment the abc deserves when interviewed in Tassie by the ABC, here.
LM is nonpareil.
cohenite
22 Feb 13 at 2:35 pm
Newvastle
Newcastle.cohenite
22 Feb 13 at 2:36 pm
Fuck it.
cohenite
22 Feb 13 at 2:37 pm
There would be local drivers of sea ice extent. So at present the polar sea would be colder than usual and thus more ice than usual for this time of year. Last summer it was a bit warmer than usual and thus there was a bit less ice than average.
Thus unrelated to climate change, just a slight variation on the concern for the cute and cuddly polar bears.
Entropy
22 Feb 13 at 2:42 pm
Actually, the record Arctic sea ice minimum last year was partially due to a large storm over the Arctic last August, which broke up, and pushed the ice South, into warmer waters.
Looking at any chart showing historical Sea Ice extent over the years, 2012 looks like any other recent year until August, then a dramatic drop, and a dramatic rise.
Currently Arctic Sea Ice extent is right in the middle of the previous 10 years. I’m not saying it’s not decreasing, but it’s not likely that the Arctic will be ice free any time soon.
MattyB
22 Feb 13 at 3:05 pm
I was just on hold with Origin energy for a couple of minutes. While on hold they peppered me with ‘save the planet’ type messages, including buying an electric car and having a wall charger installed.
When the operator came on the line and ran through her script, she asked me whether I wanted to ‘save the planet with green power’ or whatever the line was. She actually laughed and said ‘I have to ask this’. I responded ‘hell, no’ and she laughed and went on.
Everyone knows it’s just a stupid con now. Everyone is just going through the motions and waiting for the day when it’s all over and the circus has packed up and moved on.
brc
22 Feb 13 at 3:32 pm
[...] Check this out too: UN’s climate change chief acknowledges 17-year pause in global temperature rises! [...]
‘scary-mongers’ on the rise … | pindanpost
22 Feb 13 at 4:21 pm
If it takes at least 30 to 40 years to be sure that warming has stopped, shouldn’t it have taken 30 to 40 years of steady warming to be sure it was going on? Mid-1970s to late-1990s doesn’t seem to meet the Pachauri standard. Seems we can’t even be sure there was ever any warming that we can’t now be sure has stopped!
Boambee John
22 Feb 13 at 4:51 pm
they will just move the goalposts again.
Gab
22 Feb 13 at 4:55 pm
Lucky I’m with AGL, they dont drivel about “saving the planet” whenever you ‘phone them. Presumably Origin make a bigger margin out of green power than not-so-green power.
Bill
22 Feb 13 at 5:13 pm
Rajendra Pachauri’s IPCC predecessors based the human-induced incessant global warming concept on a trend period of no more than 15 years. That supposedly incessant trend ceased more than 15 years ago.
But it appears the protagonists of the Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change are more intransigent than their postulate.
Leo G
22 Feb 13 at 6:26 pm
Boom
.
22 Feb 13 at 6:59 pm
Close, Cohenite, close.
According to an old (and now huffed) entry in Uncyclopedia, the traditional Newcastle greeting is:
“You’re fucked.”
And the traditional respose:
“Yeah, I know.”
Pity they huffed it, as the entry was hilarious.
Mk50 of Brisbane
22 Feb 13 at 7:25 pm
Cohenite:
What a master scammer Pachuri is. He knows hes been called out but he is still bluffing his way through. He happily leaves his IQ-challenged groupies flapping in the breeze as he ‘hand on heart’ invokes scientific transparency.
David Stockwell
22 Feb 13 at 7:33 pm
Increasing sea temperatures or air temperatures is not necessary for a long term reduction in Arctic sea ice. What is sufficient is increased vertical mixing of arctic waters- and increasing ice-free area increases that mixing.
Leo G
22 Feb 13 at 7:34 pm
Yeah guys, I would really like to see a debate between Pachuri and LM; in Newcastle. Maybe Pachuri would demonstrate his new candour thus:
LM: You’re fucked.
Pachuri: I know.
cohenite
22 Feb 13 at 8:20 pm
Have any of you actually read what Pachuri said, or do you just believe what some journalist says on the subject? Have you ever heard of confirmation bias? Have any of you bothered to look at the science? Have any of you found any scientific evidence to support your dismissal of AGW? I thought not.
Geoff Wales
22 Feb 13 at 10:15 pm
In case you need some data, here is the latest showing Arctic sea ice volume.
http://haveland.com/share/arctic-death-spiral-1979-201301.png
How about this? This is what scientists mean when they talk about consensus.
http://climate365.tumblr.com/image/41276566160
Please feel free to show some evidence that challenges or refutes this data.
Geoff Wales
22 Feb 13 at 11:26 pm
Thanks for the tip, Bill. I’m changing to AGL. I believe in rewarding ethical companies.
johno
23 Feb 13 at 8:43 am
But you did think you heard voices.
Leo G
24 Feb 13 at 6:09 pm
???
What a load of fucking nonsense.
Jesus H Christ, why do we put up with these semi literate, uneducated, overblown nongs?
.
24 Feb 13 at 6:10 pm
Yes and he is an inveterate liar.
Journos usually swallow the porn engineer’s typos and lies wholesale.
Um, have you? I suppose denial would be a more relevant issue for you, given how cold it is now.
Yes, and AGW has an upper limit.
Shit tonnes.
Stop it, this black humour is appalling, you don’t think.
.
24 Feb 13 at 6:18 pm
Shut up Geoff. Get a life and stop worrying about the weather, you idiot. It’s doing fine as we’ve seen over the past 15 years.
More CO2 has been thrown up there over this time than ever and temps haven’t budged.
If you’re that concerned then support nuke.
Jc
24 Feb 13 at 6:26 pm
“Shut up Geoff. Get a life and stop worrying about the weather, you idiot. ” Do you kunderstand the difference between weather and climate?
“AGW has an upper limit.” Can you explain what this means? AFAIK Nobody knows what the upper limit is.
“Jesus H Christ, why do we put up with these semi literate, uneducated, overblown nongs?” You could explain why I’m mistaken, perhaps?
It’s fun to express opinions strongly, isn’t it? Not so much fun to do some basic research. Is there any chance someone here will reply using actual data to explain why AGW is false?
Geoff Wales
24 Feb 13 at 7:53 pm
I certainly didn’t and neither did Dot. Dot expressed the opinion it AGW has an upper limit, which I agree with incidentally.
By the way, both Dot and I seem to be in agreement with James Annan a well known and respected climate scientist around the world who thinks that after 15 years, the observational data doesn’t in any way support the predictive models and now thinks the upper limit is around 1.6 degs of warming for the rest of this century. In other words, nothing to raise your dress about and scream in fear.
Jc
24 Feb 13 at 8:08 pm
Nukes and hydro. Anytime a concerned AGW action man wants to propose them, I have a vote to throw his way.
wreckage
24 Feb 13 at 8:15 pm
Annan basically lobbed a guided missile into the sitting rooms of the AGW alarmist community even going so far as accusing one senior God of Alarmism of outright lying.
If this doesn’t send shudders up your alarmist back nothing will, Geoff.
Jc
24 Feb 13 at 8:15 pm
No doubt Geoff was wetting the bed in the 70′s along with Hansen over global cooling and peak oil. The facts are Geoff since the 70′s, according to the IPCC, we’ve had about 15 years of miniscule warming, and 17 years of fuck all.
As questioned earlier, whats causing the fluctuations in artic ice melt, Geoff? According to the IPCC it can’t be AGW, as we’ve had no warming. So stop with that bullshit.
Porn writer and some time engineers claim that it needs 30 or 40 years to see a trend is a bit suspect. After all yourself and Pachauri began bed wetting over only 15 years of warming. You’re looking like a clown Geoff, as all the models predicting unprecedented warming seem shite to say the least.
Is the climate changing? – yes. Warming? – probably. Are humans to blame? – possibly, you can’t build cities the size of Tokyo and deforest huge areas and not expect some impact. Is CO2 to blame – not on the present evidence. Is it worth worrying about? – is it fuck.
harrys on the boat
24 Feb 13 at 8:44 pm
Well shit, as far as you know…must be because you read some “science” on a left wing blog.
“AFAIK”…then you wanted to be treated as some superior intellect?
Fuck me.
.
24 Feb 13 at 8:44 pm
“Well shit, as far as you know…must be because you read some “science” on a left wing blog.”
I don’t read blogs. I try to find a reliable source, rather than trust bloggers.
“according to the IPCC, we’ve had about 15 years of miniscule warming, ” You accept the accuracy of the IPCC’s ‘statement’ here. Fair enough. Do you only accept IPCC statements that agree with your position, or because they are good science? Do they do any other good science?
2012 was the hottest year on record in the USA.
“Temperatures across the continental United States soared in 2012 to an all-time high, making last year the warmest year on record for the country by a wide margin, scientists say.”
http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2013/01/130109-warmest-year-record-2012-global-warming-science-environment-united-states/
If you look at the graph I posted above you can see that the ‘pause’ comes after a long and steady upward climb going right back to the beginning of the industrial revolution. The pause is sitting at record highs, in fact. Not what one would expect, if everything is natural.
There are several known forcings of climate:
“The climate of the Earth is affected by a number of factors. These factors are called “forcings” because they drive or “force” the climate system to change. The forcings that were probably the most important during the last millennium were: changes in the output of energy from the sun, volcanic eruptions, and changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/gw-forcing.html
Taking out other forcings leaves us with CO2 as the main culprit for rises in global temperatures.
“Model results (Crowley, T.J 2000) clearly indicate that greenhouse gas forcing is necessary for explaining the global warming of the 20th century. ”
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/images/forcing.jpg
The IPCC is only as good as the many scientists who contribute to the panel.
I could post page after page of data from reputable sources, but who will take the time to study them?
Here is one anyway.
“Improving observations of ocean heat content
show that Earth is absorbing more energy from the Sun
than it is radiating to space as heat, even during the recent solar minimum. The inferred planetary energy imbalance,0.58±0.15Wm−2 during the 6-yr period 2005–2010, confirms the dominant role of the human-made greenhouse effect in driving global climate change. Observed surface temperature change and ocean heat gain together constrain the net climate forcing and ocean mixing rates. Observed sea level rise during the Argo float era is readily accounted for by ice melt and ocean thermal expansion, but the ascendency of ice melt leads us to anticipate acceleration of the rate of sea level rise this decade.
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/11/13421/2011/acp-11-13421-2011.pdf
To those here who want to humiliate me, go ahead and give it your best shot, if that’s your idea of fun. Give everybody a good show. I know I enjoy it.
Geoff Wales
24 Feb 13 at 10:53 pm
So you don’t agree with James Annan, JC. I don’t know that even 1.6 degs isn’t lower than his lower limit.
AndrewL
26 Feb 13 at 5:31 pm
Say’s Law of climate change
mdm
26 Feb 13 at 6:17 pm
['In terms of both maximum and mean temperatures, summer 2012–13 was the warmest on record for Australia. Minimum temperatures were also significantly above average for the season, placing as the sixth warmest in 103 years of record. ']
['For Australia as a whole, summer maximum temperatures were 1.44 °C above average, making this the hottest summer in Australia since records commenced in 1910, and surpassing the previous record (held by summer 1982–83) by a large margin (0.21 °C). All States recorded maxima at least 0.95 °C warmer than average; South Australia recorded the largest anomaly at +1.98 °C. All mainland States placed in the ten highest records for summer maxima']
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/season/aus/summary.shtml
Geoff Wales
1 Mar 13 at 3:29 pm
Oh noes, not the record summer heat!!!!!111 Anything but that!
Quick tax me before I evaporate!
Come on people, turn your AC up. You know you can make next summer even warmer.
brc
1 Mar 13 at 3:51 pm
No amount of evidence can help those who don’t want to learn. There is a mountain of evidence for those with open eyes.
Sooner or later you must accept what can’t be denied.
Geoff Wales
1 Mar 13 at 6:04 pm
Yes, Geoff. It is pleasing that Dr Pachauri is starting to actually address the data.
If he looks just a tiny weenie bit harder he might notice that the preeminent scientist in his own country, Prof Rao, is a GCR physicist and has determined that nearly half of 20th C temperature rise is due to the solar dynamo. Several other groups have found the same thing. And most of the rest is due to cyclical phenomena which the UK Met Office has just now been forced to notice. When A is added to B the whole shebang will come crashing down, as Lindzen will be proved correct.
Bruce of Newcastle
1 Mar 13 at 6:19 pm
“Determined”? You mean argued, I guess. There is plenty of debate about the significance of cosmic rays.
Here are some papers that contradict Prof Rao:
Lockwood and Frohlich argued that, “There is considerable evidence for solar influence on the Earth’s pre-industrial climate and the Sun may well have been a factor in post-industrial climate change in the first half of the last century. Here we show that over the past 20 years, all the trends in the Sun
that could have had an influence on the Earth’s climate have been in the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures.”
http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/lockwood2007.pdf
http://www.realclimate.org/images//forcings.jpeg
The direct RF due to increase in solar irradiance is reduced from the TAR. The best estimate is +0.12 W m–2 (90% confidence interval: +0.06 to +0.30 W m–2). While there have been advances in the direct solar irradiance variation, there remain large uncertainties. The level of scientific understanding is elevated to low relative to TAR for solar forcing due to direct irradiance change, while declared as very low for cosmic ray influences
Pasted from
In conclusion, we deduce that cosmic rays play only a minor part in the global warming observed in the last century (less than 8% of the rise in temperature).
Sloan and Wolfendale
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1108.1047.pdf
The Met Office have replied to the article in the Mail: “It is the second article Mr Rose has written which contains some misleading information.”
“…changes in the surface temperature occur not just due to internal variability, but are also influenced by “external forcings”, such as changes in solar activity, volcanic eruptions or aerosol emissions. Combined, several of these factors could account for some or all of the reduced warming trend seen over the last decade – but this is an area of ongoing research.”
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/
Geoff Wales
1 Mar 13 at 10:06 pm