Global Warming Death Rate

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by Solanum

I suspect that the primary problem is that science education in schools just doesn't give enough grasp of how science works and how it is validated. In fact if you compare the various assessment reports (from AR1-4), you can see how science works because you'll see that the conclusions and predictions have changed as more information has been gathered over the years.

The IPCC projections of scary increased temperatures have decreased markedly over the years. So some reality is intruding into the models. But they are models, based on hypothesis that still need to be tested.

Considering you are so big on the scientific method, perhaps you could advise what tests the AGW hypothsis has passed, and what tests have failed to falsify it.

And if you think skeptics are so ignorant, perhaps you could hold you discussions with Bob Carter or Ian Pilmer. Bob has a number of videos available on youtube.

Once again it is all ad homeniem attacks. It shows how poor the evidence is for this scam.

[Argonavis (William)]

For ten years or more, professor David Deming has taught a course in environmental geology at the University of Oklahoma.

Professor Deming is well-known to be a global-warming skeptic. In 2006, he testified before the US Senate:

“In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.

I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”

“There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. "

This hysteria is still apparent, even as global temperatures show a pronounced cooling trend. If CO2 is the prime forcer, rather than being insignificant, then there should be evidence.

http://www.nocarbontaxes.org/whatglobalwarming.html

[Whizgig (Eugene)]

Ok I put this to you If there is such a thing how come when I was a boy summers were longer and warmer then they are now, I used to go swimming everyday now even in the mids of or summer we would be lucky to get into the 30deg mark 3-4 days in the hole of summer, But back it the 70's we had 30+ days nearly every day all summer long. Now on the other hand also our winter is getting longer and colder so if anything we are in a global cooling not a warming, also if it is happening it not us that is doing it it is industry and governments that are at fault and it is on their heads not ours they made it this way due to their pollicies not ours.

Thats what I think anyway.

[Solanum]

Originally Posted by Argonavis

The IPCC projections of scary increased temperatures have decreased markedly over the years. So some reality is intruding into the models. But they are models, based on hypothesis that still need to be tested.

Once, again that isn't correct. As our understanding of the climate and the changes we are generating has improved the predictions have got tighter and the most likely scenario worse. Also we are tracking the worst case scenario of the ones proposed by the IPCC.

Considering you are so big on the scientific method, perhaps you could advise what tests the AGW hypothsis has passed, and what tests have failed to falsify it.

And if you think skeptics are so ignorant, perhaps you could hold you discussions with Bob Carter or Ian Pilmer. Bob has a number of videos available on youtube.

Once again it is all ad homeniem attacks. It shows how poor the evidence is for this scam.

Without meaning to be rude (and adding to your unfounded accusations of personal attacks), and I mean that sincerely, your questions really just demonstrate that you have little understanding of the what is or isn't known, how we do or don't know it and what the likely outcome is.

I suggest you and anyone else who is interested read this:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-re...r4-wg1-spm.pdf

It is the summary of the 4th Assessment report for policymakers and is the simplest way of expressing what we do and don't know and how uncertain we are or aren't. It is only 18 pages and has plenty of figures.

If you have specific questions you can then refer to the main report, or I am happy to point you at the correct bit. If you want clarification I'll do my best, though I am a plant biologist not a climatologist so clearly my direct knowledge is very much greater of plant responses than climate responses.

[Jen]

Originally Posted by Whizgig

Ok I put this to you If there is such a thing how come when I was a boy summers were longer and warmer then they are now, I used to go swimming everyday now even in the mids of or summer we would be lucky to get into the 30deg mark 3-4 days in the hole of summer, But back it the 70's we had 30+ days nearly every day all summer long. Now on the other hand also our winter is getting longer and colder so if anything we are in a global cooling not a warming, also if it is happening it not us that is doing it it is industry and governments that are at fault and it is on their heads not ours they made it this way due to their pollicies not ours.

Thats what I think anyway.

well i like your way of thinking

[avandonk]

I would just like to say all you people that do not believe the computer models. Just explain to me how you would apply a second order partial differential equation to a real world model and then I will even begin to argue with you about climate change.This is your entry into the debate.

If you then pass this simple test you then may explain to me how elliptical integrals can be applied to real world problems.

If you cannot, you can not nay say climate models as you do not have a clue!

Climate change unfortunately is very real. The real world evidence is irrefutable. I keep seeing falsehoods promulgated by the fossil fuel industries.

Weather change is not climate change! Personally I don't really care as I am nearly sixty. But our children and grandchildren etc to infinitum might.

Bert

[Whizgig (Eugene)]

Sorry but computer models are fallible, they can not predict future events they only go by what they are programmed to say and by what is written in their program by the programmer who wants a specific result that is determinant only by the relevant data that he or she puts in but that data is wrong as no day is the same so therefore it can not work, also the program can be written to give whatever answer the programmer want regardless of the information received by the computer, as in rigged just ask the State of California voters in the last election as it is all done by computer and it spat out the winner before the election votes were at 10% so work that one out, and guess what it was right but only according to its programming and what the programmer was told to make it do by the government to get the desired result that they wanted.

[PeterM]

My answer the original question posed by xenaslave - what is the death rate likely to be from GW theory – none, well not directly.
How about the pensioner(s), sick, disabled etc barely surviving the week on a meagre pension who will suffer ill health and yes maybe even death when they can’t afford the extra $20 or $50 etc etc increase in their power bills etc, that will come about from proposed insane carbon taxes that the government are considering. Who will take that responsibility? Won’t happen? I just found my electricity supplier has been charging me 100% green power (at a premium) and $1 per week for the past year to reduce my carbon footprint. I had never asked for this. So yes, deaths may certainly occur .
Thank goodness credible scientists are now getting equal (and more) media attention and with real facts and figures. This is obviousy a concern to the GW theory / alarmists. Reputations must be at stake.
Quick story I remembered – 100 years or so years ago, public warned that increased horse transportation / traffic would have the streets feet deep in horse poo….
PeterM