Again Hugh - very interesting and useful to know. However, do also
beware smoke and mirrors . . .
Two points: -
[1] the 'reliability' of climate models.
This issue cuts two way. The case can be significantly made that
the climate-models informing the IPCC consensus *are unreliable* in
that they under-estimate the problem [too many feedbacks are
omitted].
[2] sceptics.
Sceptic Fred Singer has published: - "A new climate treaty would at
least pay lip service to the obligations of developing nations,
although it could probably not require them to reduce emissions.
Instead, a new Kyoto might be shaped by the notion of “Contraction
and Convergence” [Meyer 2000] now popular in European environmental
circles."
Unstoppable Global Warming - Fred Singer Dennis Avery [Note the
title]
Richard Lindzen has said: - "I agree to stabilize concentrations
you have to have emissions contraction and to have contraction you
have to have convergence. I just don't believe humanity has the wit
to organize that."
Fair comment to me over supper at a Climate Conference in Pisa
2004. http://www.gci.org.uk/endorsements_sceptics.html
Patrick Micheals agrees there's a problem, but that its happening
much more slowly than some people say.
Before Kyoto [1997] sceptics and the US-ff-industry united behind a
position which said: -"there isn't a problem . . . and you can't
solve it without Developing Countries." [!]
The NGO response was the mirror-image which said: - "There is a
problem . . . and you can solve it without Developing Countries."
[!!]
Please login or sign up to post on this network. Click here to sign up now.
1 Comment
Two points: -
[1] the 'reliability' of climate models.
This issue cuts two way. The case can be significantly made that the climate-models informing the IPCC consensus *are unreliable* in that they under-estimate the problem [too many feedbacks are omitted].
[2] sceptics.
Sceptic Fred Singer has published: - "A new climate treaty would at least pay lip service to the obligations of developing nations, although it could probably not require them to reduce emissions. Instead, a new Kyoto might be shaped by the notion of “Contraction and Convergence” [Meyer 2000] now popular in European environmental circles."
Unstoppable Global Warming - Fred Singer Dennis Avery [Note the title]
Richard Lindzen has said: - "I agree to stabilize concentrations you have to have emissions contraction and to have contraction you have to have convergence. I just don't believe humanity has the wit to organize that."
Fair comment to me over supper at a Climate Conference in Pisa 2004. http://www.gci.org.uk/endorsements_sceptics.html
Patrick Micheals agrees there's a problem, but that its happening much more slowly than some people say.
Before Kyoto [1997] sceptics and the US-ff-industry united behind a position which said: -"there isn't a problem . . . and you can't solve it without Developing Countries." [!]
The NGO response was the mirror-image which said: - "There is a problem . . . and you can solve it without Developing Countries." [!!]
Click here to sign up now.