We got it all wrong on warming, says IPCC

[silverfaun]

  At last we are getting the truth about "The greatest moral challenge of our time" The "Global Warming " hysteria we have been subjected to now is a totally wrong prediction & no discernaable change since 1976.

The name calling, invoking the holocaust "denier" tag on all  who had the temerity to question.

  We got it wrong on warming, says IPCC

THE Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest assessment reportedly admits its computer drastically overestimated rising temperatures, and over the past 60 years the world has in fact been warming at half the rate claimed in the previous IPCC report in 2007.

More importantly, according to reports in British and US media, the draft report appears to suggest global temperatures were less sensitive to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide than was previously thought.

The 2007 assessment report said the planet was warming at a rate of 0.2C every decade, but according to Britain's The Daily Mail the draft update report says the true figure since 1951 has been 0.12C.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/we-got-it-wrong-on-warming-says-ipcc/story-e6frg...

[lakeland27]

yes. they want to take over. ban ki moon is really an agent of nth korea. the UN is a communist plot , a cunning nth korean/chinese /russian joint effort to rule the world.

[debra9275]

yep, it's all a conspiracy lol

[windrake]

Although the IPCC is in crisis talks trying to obscure & remove  their mistakes I am very interested in the NIPCC report that is reported to be released this Thursday that is even more damaging to the IPCC modelling, the modelling that seems to have been grossly inflated to suit their agenda.

The politicization of the BOM & CSIRO  has been subjugated to the Labor view to help them push their "Global Warming & Carbon Tax" agenda.

Tim Flannery is also another one who should be exposed aalthough there is a lot out the public domain that has discredited him. The rent seekers time is nearing an end.

It's a real shame that the CSIRO has been so badly damaged in this "Global Warming" religion that has swept the Labor party & the grossly inaccurate "Inconvenient Truth" video is still being shown in school albeit with the 7 major untruths pointed out but it should be removed from the curricula as it's not factual educational material.

So the NIPCC report is eagerly awaited by the global community to shine a light on exactly what is going on  with the IPCC & their manipulations.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@ashjoma wrote:
IT'S ALL A SCAM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With a bigger, nasty agenda behind it

---

And that agenda is...?

[lakeland27]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@ashjoma wrote:
IT'S ALL A SCAM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With a bigger, nasty agenda behind it

---

And that agenda is...?

---

try Alex Jones 'prison planet' he's the guru of the loopy paranoid collective.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@lakeland27 wrote:

---

try Alex Jones 'prison planet' he's the guru of the loopy paranoid collective.

---

Alex Jones OMG!

Lol - what on earth would the conspiracy theorists around the world do without Alex Jones putting 2 + 2 together to get 7?

[spotweldersfriend]

But no mention of the politicization of the public service and the AFP -(Dr Haneef) by the Howard regime.Short memory, windy?

[monman12]

WR: "The politicization of the BOM & CSIRO  has been subjugated to the Labor view to help them push their "Global Warming & Carbon Tax" agenda."

What absolute nonsense WR. How on earth can observations / data-sets / records  be politicised?

SF, instead of quoting media sources, who when it comes to science   prefer headlines over facts, why not actually read the IPCC report,  or a synopsis of it?, because it is obvious you have not (and are not alone here)

I would also point out that because a forecast (read the report) is said to be incorrect (read the report and the actual terminology) it does not detract from the  observed and recorded data that leads to  a particular extrapolation.

If you wish to refute science present  credible study(s), I suggest starting with the CSIRO or the BOM Atmospheric Science divisions. Another favourite of mine is NASA/Goddard Institute and  memories from my studies in climatology/meteorology/physics.

In science extrapolating can be uncertain, so it is a silly argument to quote (by media hearsay) a qualified forecast within a report as proof  of a differing position you hold, especially when you have not bothered to read the original report, and do not understand the Scientific Method.

nɥºɾ

[ashjoma]

go and do abit of research, it is there to discover !

And Alex jones is a good listen.  He researches thoroughly and does not just say anything.

He has an accuracy of about 98 %

.

[jethro_woolfe]

---

@ashjoma wrote:

go and do abit of research, it is there to discover !

And Alex jones is a good listen.  He researches thoroughly and does not just say anything.

He has an accuracy of about 98 %

i'd like to see some proof of that ludicrous claim. did he make it himself ? 

.

---