Source: Suspicious0bservers.org
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate Change. Show all posts
"This Should Not Come as a Surprise": Bill McKibben on Global Extreme Weather from U.S. to Sochi, February 13, 2014
Source: democracynow.org
While governors have declared states of emergency from Louisiana to New Jersey due to the massive snow and ice storm, other examples of extreme weather are being seen across the globe. California is facing possibly its worst drought in 500 years.
In Russia temperatures have topped 60 degrees Fahrenheit at the Winter Olympic in Sochi. Meanwhile in Britain, gusts of more than 100 miles per hour lashed western England and Wales overnight. And in London the Thames has risen to its highest level in decades. "This is the kind of crazy weather that scientists said will mark the advent of climate change in its early stages," says 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben. "
And it should be the warning that we need to actually do something, but so far our leaders haven't taken up that challenge." -democracynow.org
While governors have declared states of emergency from Louisiana to New Jersey due to the massive snow and ice storm, other examples of extreme weather are being seen across the globe. California is facing possibly its worst drought in 500 years.
In Russia temperatures have topped 60 degrees Fahrenheit at the Winter Olympic in Sochi. Meanwhile in Britain, gusts of more than 100 miles per hour lashed western England and Wales overnight. And in London the Thames has risen to its highest level in decades. "This is the kind of crazy weather that scientists said will mark the advent of climate change in its early stages," says 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben. "
And it should be the warning that we need to actually do something, but so far our leaders haven't taken up that challenge." -democracynow.org
The Corbett Report | Global Warming Minute - Why is the IPCC "95% Certain" that Climate Change is Manmade?, September 29, 2013
Source: corbettreport.com
In recent days, you’ve probably heard ad nauseum that the UN’s new IPCC report claims that it is “95% certain” that humans are causing climate change.
95% is a very specific number. So where does it come from?
The IPCC uses a “likelihood scale” that assigns percentages to various phrases, ranging from “exceptionally unlikely” (0-1% probability) to “virtually certain” (99-100% probability). This sounds like it is based on a precise scientific measurement or well-defined statistical process, but when it comes to deciding how likely it is that climate change is manmade, this is in fact a subjective decision that is made by the report’s authors.
According to the IPCC: “The approaches used in detection and attribution research […] cannot fully account for all uncertainties, and thus ultimately expert judgment is required to give a calibrated assessment of whether a specific cause is responsible for a given climate change.”
In other words, the “95% probability” that is making all of the headlines is nothing more than an arbitrary number decided on in closed door meetings between the report authors. Still, it serves an important propaganda purpose in giving a veneer of scientific credibility to the decision, one that a media that never bothers to explain these decisions to you thinks you will be too stupid to figure out for yourself:
So how reliable is the IPCC process in general? That will be the subject of next week’s report. Transcript & Sources
In recent days, you’ve probably heard ad nauseum that the UN’s new IPCC report claims that it is “95% certain” that humans are causing climate change.
95% is a very specific number. So where does it come from?
The IPCC uses a “likelihood scale” that assigns percentages to various phrases, ranging from “exceptionally unlikely” (0-1% probability) to “virtually certain” (99-100% probability). This sounds like it is based on a precise scientific measurement or well-defined statistical process, but when it comes to deciding how likely it is that climate change is manmade, this is in fact a subjective decision that is made by the report’s authors.
According to the IPCC: “The approaches used in detection and attribution research […] cannot fully account for all uncertainties, and thus ultimately expert judgment is required to give a calibrated assessment of whether a specific cause is responsible for a given climate change.”
In other words, the “95% probability” that is making all of the headlines is nothing more than an arbitrary number decided on in closed door meetings between the report authors. Still, it serves an important propaganda purpose in giving a veneer of scientific credibility to the decision, one that a media that never bothers to explain these decisions to you thinks you will be too stupid to figure out for yourself:
So how reliable is the IPCC process in general? That will be the subject of next week’s report. Transcript & Sources
Piers Corbyn | Debunking More Climate Change Mumbo-Jumbo, December 13, 2011
Source: infowars.com, weatheraction.com
December 13, 2011–Alex talks about the United Nations' Durban, South Africa climate conference with Meteorologist Piers Corbyn, who is a meteorologist, astrophysicist, outspoken critic of the theory of anthropogenic global warming, and owner of the business Weather Action.
December 13, 2011–Alex talks about the United Nations' Durban, South Africa climate conference with Meteorologist Piers Corbyn, who is a meteorologist, astrophysicist, outspoken critic of the theory of anthropogenic global warming, and owner of the business Weather Action.
ShareThis
