Whew! I thought there was an actual danger (if you hit the paywall, try searching the article on Google or Yahoo or something. That’s the way I get in)
World has two decade window to stave off ‘dangerous’ climate change
The world has a two decade window to build an efficient, low carbon society or risk being “locked-in” to a pathway towards dangerous levels of climate change, authors of the latest UN-backed climate change report have warned.
Working group three (WGIII) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will on Sunday release its latest report, calling for a fundamental shift in global investment from fossil fuels to renewable energy and other green technologies, as a means of tackling escalating climate change risks.
Which amuses me to no end, since all these folks working for the IPCC, along with most “climate change” groups, use vast amounts of fossil fuels to get to and from their constant “climate change” meetings, symposiums, speeches, conferences, and demonstrations.
Twenty years is great, because Desmond Tutu gave us only 15! And James Hansen only gave us 4 back in 2009. Al Gore predicting climate doom in 10 years (that was 2007). And there so many examples of wacko-enviro and climate alarmist doomsaying. Remember the Population Bomb? Fail. How about the claims of the Arctic being ice free? Fail. Schoolkids in Britain won’t know what snow looks like? Fail. A 2 degree rise in global temps by 2010? Fail. Australia being a desert hell? Fail. Now they claim that Australia will be a flooded hell. Claims of hurricane activity like the 2005 season being the new normal. Fail. Mass starvation as food crops fail. Fail. Mass migrations of people causing constant war. Fail. Seriously, are there any Warmist predictions that are coming true?
Infrastructure being built over the next two decade will determine the shape of society and the global economy at the end of this century, so it is essential to ensure the right technologies are put in place, Benoit Lefevre, lead author of the IPCC WGIII chapter on renewable energy and fossil fuel investments, told BusinessGreen.
“Time is crucial – we have two decades of opportunity,” he said. “The world is urbanising and the cities we are going to have at the end of the century are being built right now. All the infrastructure will be developed during the next 10 to 20 years. Here we have a clear opportunity to do it in a smart, efficient, and low carbon way – so it’s really a matter of acting now.”
When in doubt, follow the money. And the Progressive notion of Big Government
“To put us on the right track… we need to have a combination of push and pull factors,” he said. “On one end we need developed countries to create a set of institutional arrangements, to adopt the right loans and regulations to effectively mobilise climate finance. On the other hand, we need developing countries to put in place the right set of policies, institutions, etc to attract this private and public finance.” (snip)
“The report calls for an ‘all hands on deck’ approach – there are roles for the private and public sector,” Levin said. “This is a problem of the global commons and every individual and every company and every country needs to be part of the solution.”
Which is funny, because Warmists don’t practice what they preach, they just want Everyone Else to be forced to follow their dogma. You can feel the fascism. In fact, one of the lines in the final draft summary reads “Effective mitigation will not be achieved if individual agents advance their own interests independently” (via Climate Depot). This is about reducing liberty and forcing everyone to comply with the cult of climate change.
Oh, and this is the current climate hell
Again, it’s actually 8 months, approaching 9 months, but you get the idea from the graph.
The last 2 times you posted temp graphs neither showed a pause
Show them again please
Could a similar graph but with any other time axis other than shown indicate close to the same results? Or does it only work with that time frame ?
For those who are in the top 1% income bracket the effects will be much less than on the rest of the world’s population if you are in the median income group at about 1300$ per year you will be much more vulnerable.
Oh and Teach an income of 34000$ puts you in the top 1% of the worlds population
Actually, if we choose to continue to ignore the warnings, the arctic will be ice-free starting from last year! As we all know, Eskimos hate ice free water and will riot and ransack like the Vikings did when this happened last time. Be on the lookout for wild Eskimos.
It’s only a matter of time.
Oh sh*t. They prefer to be called Inuit’s now. This is just the token cause they were looking for to set them off. What evil have I wrought!?!?
Gird your loins men. They’re coming.
Readers, Mr. Teach is trying to mislead you again with the graph from Lord Mungton.
The RSS dataset he uses shows the least warming of the several available datasets. In addition, they carefully cherry-pick a start date to make it appear “flat”. The equally valid UAH satellite, NOAA land-sea, GISTEMP land-sea, HadCrut land-sea, BEST land and NOAA land datasets all show much greater warming than the RSS.
Mr. Teach refuses to justify his selective use of data for reasons only he knows.
Fortunately, you do not have to depend on a liar such as Teach, but you can actually plot the data yourselves: http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php
Here are the 20 year trends in parentheses (degrees C/decade) from each dataset: NOAA (0.09), GISTEMP(0.11), HadCrut (0.09), BEST-land (0.21), NOAA-land (0.19), RSS-satellite (0.03), UAH-satellite (0.12). They all show warming with RSS showing the least.
How is it that Teach and Mungton stumbled upon the RSS dataset that yielded the least warming?? And then only when you select the less than obvious time of 17 yrs 8 months.
Mr. Teach does not want you to think for yourselves, he is trying to persuade you by showing only part of the data.
Hi Jeffery. I looked at the calculator you linked. Each data set shows warming of some kind between .4 and .8 of a degree Celsius since 1970. That means another degree change by 2100. Unless there is something else, that is not a scary number. I also looked at the solutions link but found no real proposals that will change the warming trend. It will take much more than Alternate Energy to change the current use of fossil fuels. Nuclear power plants are the only current technology with the capacity to make a dent in the use of fossil fuel and only in the generation of electrical power. The harder problem to solve is the replacement of fossil fuel motive power for ships, trains, trucks and planes which move almost all of the food and products (and people) around the world. It will take a vast reduction in everybody’s lifestyle to reduce the demand for food and goods that are moved by fossil fuel. Look around your home; everything you see was produced and moved to your home by fossil fuels. Even home grown foods rely on tools that were produced and delivered by fossil fuel and if cooked, cooked by fossil fuel. Warmists have a long way to go to propose everyday solutions to reducing the power requirements of modern living. I doubt the “shrinking island” islanders are willing to give up the food and goods available to them by denying fossil fuel ship deliveries. Blick
Jeffrey’s just trying to lull you into complacency for the coming Eskimo storm. I think he might be one of them. Trust me, they’re coming. And there’s only one thing on their minds. Pain. Yours.
(Hey, does anyone know how to put in an image of a big bloodshot eye here?)
Funny-No different than some crazy religious group that comes along every few years telling us “the end is near!” I’m so scared.
Irony: Jeffery calling Teach a liar and then linking to a proven liar’s web site.
Nighthawk,
Do you believe the temperature trend calculator to be using false data? Or to plot the data dishonestly? Or are you just denying science that challenges your belief system?
The data show that the Earth continues to warm, even for the last 17 years 8 months. Mr. Teach and Lord Mungton searched and sorted the datasets until they found one (out of 7) and a time interval (really? 17 yrs 8 months?) that fit their belief system, and compound it by trying to use that dishonest construct to persuade others of his beliefs.
j,
I wish it was funny! But actually the issue of global warming and importantly, what to do about it, is very different from a crazy religious group telling you the “end is near”. If 90% of the experts in a scientific discipline agree on an issue, it’s advisable to at least listen to them. If 97% of communicable disease experts agreed that an H5N1 or MERS strain has mutated to be more easily transmitted and is sweeping the globe and that we should immunize our children, we should at least listen to then, rather than accuse them of being part of a UN conspiracy to control conservatives.
The difference between one crazy person carrying a sign proclaiming “The End is Near” and thousands of climate scientists proclaiming “The Earth is warming from greenhouse gases” is, of course, overwhelming scientific evidence.
You should not be scared, but you should be concerned. The end is not near. The Earth will not be destroyed. Humankind will not be eliminated. But life will get more and more difficult for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren because of our inaction today. We can prevent the worst of it at little cost to ourselves, yet we refuse. Why? Are we really that selfish?