The Times of London writes:
The UN body that advises world leaders on climate change must investigate an apparent bias in its report that resulted in several exaggerations of the impact of global warming, according to its former chairman.
In an interview with The Times Robert Watson said that all the errors exposed so far in the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) resulted in overstatements of the severity of the problem.
Professor Watson, currently chief scientific adviser to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said that if the errors had just been innocent mistakes, as has been claimed by the current chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, some would probably have understated the impact of climate change.
***
Professor Watson, who served as chairman of the IPCC from 1997-2002, said: “The mistakes all appear to have gone in the direction of making it seem like climate change is more serious by overstating the impact. That is worrying. The IPCC needs to look at this trend in the errors and ask why it happened.”
In a slap at IPCC's scientific accuracy, Watson also suggested that the IPCC should employ graduate science students to check the sources of each claim made in its next report.
Like many of my fellow travellers I like to chat with God; Fiona, that’s Her name, is a good listener and does offer me the occasional advice. The last chat I had with Fiona was about something that burns my brain – climate change.
ReplyDeleteYou see I have no idea who to believe when it comes to carbon “pollution” and anthropogenic global warming. I had two questions for Fiona: What causes our climate to change? And, do human beings contribute to global warming?
Fiona informed me that the complex matrix of variables related to climate change could not be comprehended by mere mortals. “After all” said Fiona, “have you ever been able to understand the inner workings of your wife’s mind?” “That’s a hard one” I replied.
She then followed with a more difficult question: “Do you not think it a little bit arrogant of you, or anyone else, to think you could understand the way I manage your universe, let alone get me to change my ways?”
I must admit at that point I felt like looking for another God; but She did follow that if human beings had their hearts set on this carbon reduction game then She had a solution that would meet all our carbon reduction targets for years to come. And it would be painless; so painless in fact we could party for the rest of our lives and reduce carbon levels.
“How’ I enquired. “War.” She replied.
Fiona then informed me that if war was a country the annual carbon emissions would equal 139 of the world’s nations. “Wow Fiona, I never thought about that.” I replied.
She then suggested a little homework regarding war and carbon emissions. “After all I did give humans a particularly large brain and a free will, so get to it.” She ordered – mmm, so much for free will.
Having consulted my trusty abacus, slide rule and particularly large (overworked) brain it soon became obvious that if homo sapiens stopped dropping bombs, building war ships, tanks and nuclear bombs we could meet all our carbon reduction targets for the next 137 years, 9 months, 3 days, 2 hours, 25 minutes and 13 seconds; this is a fact, if you don’t believe me then consult the scientists.
When I got back to Fiona She was most pleased that I had done my homework and rewarded me with a sunny day and a headache (She really does work in a mysterious way – but so does my beautiful wife).
She then concluded that Homo sapiens were a weird mob, for too often a solution to their problem stares them in the face – but they keep telling it to go away.
Anonymous said: "Like many of my fellow travelers I like to chat with God..."
ReplyDelete:) Nice piece of creative writing, especially the "headache" comment! Fun read!
Ah, yes, war. Our culture, human culture, has been excessively parasitized by the war meme. The concept of and belief in war is a type of virus that is transmitted by sociopaths. The Gobal Warming scam is just a modern variation of the war concept. It posits a faceless enemy, one that we must mobilize against and give up our choices, our freedom and our money to fight. It is a new type of battle which will kill the poor of undeveloped countries and impoverish the masses in the advanced nations. It is, like all wars, a battle which enriches the war mongers and their propagandists. We, as a species, are so over run and controled by these controling sociopaths that it is virtually impossible for us to regain our mental health. There are two problems with ridding ourselves of sociopaths. The first is detection. How do you identify them? Modern technology (PET scans) can show whether a person's emotional and empathetic ability is normally functioning. The second problem is how do you get rid of them. This is a more difficult problem. Sociopaths have no guilt, no remorse, no conscience. They are not restrained by ethics, not by law, and not by social disapproval. There is NO EASY WAY TO PREVENT THEIR PREDATION. How do you stop wolves in the fold?
From "Super Freakonomics" pg 171. "human activity accounts for just 2% of global carbon-dioxide emissions, with the remainder generated by natural processes like plant decay."
ReplyDelete