You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Potholer54's Response to "The Global Warming Hoax Lord Monckton & Stefan Molyneux"
Nesting limit, in response to your cartoon: seriously, is this helpful?
That being said, following a link from the first, I find:
The IPCC described the warming trend of the 20th Century as being “broadly consistent with climate models, but also of the same magnitude as natural climate variability”
The quoted text is from the IPCC, and the quote is used in the context of the actual rise in temperatures since that first IPCC report, half of their prediction, is a straight-line continuation of the previous 100 years temperature.
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/12/the-ipcc-was-wrong-england-and-the-abc-mislead-australians/
Yes, I think it's greatly helpful! We all fall for that trap and it's a funny reminder to be aware of it.
I could look to blogs rebutting Joanna Nova's perspective (yes, I did the google thing also), but instead I'll defer to the potholer54's videos which also address IPCC findings. The one I linked to above about scientific consensus also links out to other videos which don't rely on computer models or the IPCC at all. I've done enough research for myself to come to the conclusions I have now. If you have peer-reviewed scientific papers you can link to which would help me have a more accurate view, I'd love to see them.
Thank you, this is useful. I'll continue slowly with the video.
But I'm not so much as interested in Joanna Nova's perspective, more in the couple of statements regarding the first IPCC predictions, statements which question potholer's first source. (And just reading a little about Christopher Monckton - well, I trust him less than potholer).
OK, finished the video. Most of it seemed to be an ad hominum attack on Molyneux (who is he? Is he important?), so the video doesn't really seem to be about the debate, more the debaters.
But one point jumped out, this from potholer's graphic on positive forcing. He missed the effect of increasing cloud albedo on moderating temperature rise (negative forcing). And since you asked for "peer-reviewed papers {}"... here one is:
Warming-induced increase in aerosol number concentration likely to moderate climate change
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n6/full/ngeo1800.html
The link has only the an abstract.