The world’s greatest climate scientist, forecast 0.6ºC warming from 1997 to 2013.
www.klimaskeptiker.info/download/1988_Hansen_etal.pdf
Instead, we got 0.00ºC warming.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
Hansen only missed by a factor of infinity. His spectacular incompetence makes him a hero and legend with progressives, Kook, Nuttercelli, Guardian, et. al.
You and I are past having any useful attempt at exchanging ideas. I could read your source and see the flaws in the premise that you don’t see, and I could send you sources showing the nuances of the story that led you to the wrong conclusion. But neither us respects the other at this point and it would be a waste of time.
Twilight Zone music ……
mares eat oats and does eat oats……..
I always thought that was marezie dolts and doughzy dolts and little hams dedive ve.
LOL….that’s the way my niece sings it!
Aw, come on. Give it a shot, you might just hit on some valuable information that nobody can see but you. Don’t keep us in suspense.
…this is a hoot
Rather than meaningless weasel words why don’t you actually tell us why Hansen’s spectacular miss is actually correct 😉
Actually, I know the whole story and you could only tweak it slightly. Scenario C is clearly not the correct one to use as this one said CO2 would stop growing. He still would be off by 0.4 to 0.5 C. And off by infinity if you look at the slope.
Actually Bill, I think you will see that scenario B is a .6 increase. The Business as usual one I think. I think global emissions actually out ran B, but accumulation lagged. At any rate spectacularly wrong it is. Any attempt to defend it is inane.
“I could read your source and see the flaws in the premise…”
But parrots cannot see flaws in AGW. How odd. 😆
Defense lawyer for CO?: “If the data doesn’t fit, you must acquit!”
The real undeniable fact is that Hansen theory is complete bunk. This is shown by the elementary observation that CO2 levels have continued to rise and in contrast to Hansen unfounded assertion, temperatures have not. Hansen’s theory is complete rot, has no basis in science.
He (almost singlehandedly) has put back climate research in this country by decades, and ensured many, many $million were wasted on this hokum.
Of course if you can show otherwise, please do.
How much of CO2 increase is due to oceans and how much is human (not Mann) made? I don’t know this…
And volcanoes, deforestation, etc, etc…
IPCC figures are total rot as they are grossly manipulated to exaggerate CO2’s effect.
As ManicBeancounter puts it
from http://joannenova.com.au/2013/09/pr-wars-ipcc-fights-for-relevance-halves-warming-claims-to-be-95-certain-of-something-vaguer/#comment-1317769
Thanks Tom0mason, thanks for the link.
I’m curious because of the lag between temperature and CO2 rise.
I’ve read that it’s estimated to be of the order of many centuries for CO2 increase after temperatures, but we also have now this problem of atmospheric dryness, low cloudiness, possibly connected also with increased CO2 and I was wondering if these two phenomena in fact have a cyclical nature associate with long period solar cycles.
We just had these strong solar cycles last century and now the CO2 reaching relatively high values for the Holocene and, if the two phenomena could be connected, the CO2 increase would lag behind temperatures by a few decades not centuries.
Even the activist Real Climate site gave up defending the Hansen forecast several years ago. Good to see yaya is confident to think he can set the deniers straight. Of course, over confidence and stupidity are sometimes highly correlated. 😉
Try us!
It certainly would be a waste of time. Anybody who writes science blogs and believes that division by zero results in infinity is ineducable.
Suffer a head injury recently?
I actually saw somebody on J. Curry’s blog defending the BBC predicting Arctic ice would be gone by 2013. He emphasized that they said “could” be gone. So there you have it, the excuse for all failures. I’m sure Hansen had a hidden disclaimer in there somewhere. They dare not venture far from the land of “most likely”, which is near the islands of “likely”, “possibly”, “maybe” , “could”, “high confidence” and the biggest island, “SUGGESTS”.
The data “suggests” there “could” be a “possibility” of a “likely” event in which we have “high confidence”. We are absolutely 100% “certain” that further research is essential.
Here is Professor Maslowski said to the BBC.
Here is Professor Peter Wadhams, an Arctic specialist at Cambridge University.
Here is Wadhams the previous year.
As you can see Wadhams is quite clear. No “may”, “could” or “might” attached to his 2 emphatic conclusions. No room for maneuver for the good professor. He has dug himself into a hole and if he’s wrong he will be ridiculed mercilessly. 🙂
NOTE:
I am replying to one of my comments which is currently in moderation.
Thanks for the important information, these people are real fools!! 🙂
In 1988 when Dr. Hansen gave his testimony to congress he showed that he was not a scientist but a political activist. Since that day this political baloney of CO2 causing atmospheric warming has been propagated.
Hansen was political long before 1988. He needed to be a sure thing for TimWirth and AlGore.
In 1981, Hansen announced that global warming was dead certain beyond natural variations based on a 0.2C increase over 15 years, from 1965 to 1980. Ironically, post-hoc adjustments to the temperature data have almost completely erased the temperature rise Hansen used to justify his 1981 conclusion.
In the meantime, 15 years of no temperature rise while CO2 annual emissions are 2.5 times higher than 1980, is simply brushed aside.
I suspect the deeply ingrained activism had already overwhelmed Hansen’s common sense when he was monkeying around with atmospheric models of runaway Venus for Carl “choom” Sagan.
If you look closely there’s a different shade around the line to indicate the level of uncertainty in the projection… oh nevermind, that’s the entire graph…
I wonder how much matayaya’s masters pay him to haunt this site and attempt to torment Steven and us?
I wonder if he has learned anything while visiting here or if his mind is so made up that he won’t let himself get confused with the facts.
The latter. With rare exception, once the Stoopid Virus embedded itself into the soft mush residing between the ears of Glow Bull Wormers, it’s a chronic disease with little to no chance for the infected to recover through Clue Infusion Therapy. It’s sad and tragic, not only for the sufferers of Stoopiditis extremus, but for the rest of humanity, since we all suffer the consequences of the policy decisions implemented by those in power who are afflicted with the dreaded disease.