CALM BEFORE THE STORM February 27, 2014Posted by wmmbb in CLIMATE CHANGE.
Nicolas Loris claims: “It’s time for calm on Climate Change”. Looks like climate scientists are not rigorously trained in the disciplines of science.
It is all too much pain for too little economic gain. Given the pervasive deprivations of social inequality and economic injustice, the the average and less than average survivor within the economic system, the economic threat represented by measures to mitigate climate change are small. The effect on the one percent is critical.
I suppose, it does depend on what questions are asked, what is known and on what basis. The IPCC are completely wrong. They just are. Actually it not quite that bad:
Some assume that if you believe that the climate is changing and that man-made emissions are having some warming effect, you must also accept as gospel that our planet is cooking at an unsustainable rate, that hurricanes and other meteorological disasters will inevitably become more frequent and intense, and that GHG emissions caused by burning conventional fuels are the driving force — not just one of many factors — behind climate change.
So if everybody remains calm then all will be well – or even better in the short term. By the way, if you had not noticed, warming has gone into a hiatus.(meaning that the trend of surface mean temperatures have not increased.
Furthermore, modelling is completely hopeless since the models are inconsistent. Remember, the 97% of climate scientists who are not realists really means 97% of scientific literature – and this takes no account of the opinions of political scientists, or indeed the leading climate scientists who are not undertaking climate research.
The real point is, beside the lack of evidence, unreliable modelling, and inconsequential effects of climate mitigation (although very large economic impacts) is that the theory is not supported by the facts.
Nor do the data indicate that the dominant driving force behind climate change is human-induced GHG emissions. Such a view does nothing to account for the shortcomings of climate models. While some climate models predict unsustainable warming that will adversely affect human health and public welfare, data from observed climate reality has shown that these models, and the assumptions on which they are built, are incorrect.
There is no need for the Renewable Energy Target. This argument and this conclusion will be the Warburton Committee. Thanks to the good work of Nicolas Loris and the Heritage Foundation this is o one Federal Government review among the many that is strictly unnecessary.
Doubtless, Climate Change is a subject into which is sunk emotional investment and confirmation bias. The adversarial context of political discussion. There are diametrically opposite positions taken on environmental disasters of more limited scale, including the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. In this video Nicolas Loris gives his views with respect to that “example of corporate negligence”: