Dalende interesse for klimaet

Diverse — Drokles on September 7, 2013 at 10:04 am

Hver uge kan man se forskellige tegn på at interessen for klimaet daler (og alligevel skriver jeg videre). Et mindretal tror på at mennesket har nogen synderlig indflydelse på klimaet og endnu færre kerer sig om det. Med den dalende interesse for klimaet spirer interessen omvendt for kritik af klimaindustrien. I den ukontroversielle ende kan man starte med den absurde svindel på EU’s  CO2 børs, hvilket man så også gør (Hvem ‘man’? - “Dem”!) På mandag kl. 20:00 sender Danmarks Radio nemlig en sådan dokumentar - lidt overraskende må jeg sige

EU’s første klimakvote blev sat til salg i 2005. Kvoterne skulle reducere CO2-udledningen og dermed redde kloden for den globale opvarmning. Men systemet er brudt sammen og Danmark blev i stedet centrum for én af verdens hurtigst voksende svindelnumre.

Eksperter og Europol vurderer, at statskasserne rundt om i Europa mistede op mod 70 milliarder kroner til hackere og momssvindlere fra hele verden.

Og aldrig før i menneskehedens historie er der udledt så meget CO2, som nu.

Og den udledte CO2 har ingen mærkbar effekt på temperaturen, glemte de vist at tilføje. Troværdigheden udhules også i den industri, der kun lever af at sælge gode intentioner ved at skræmme livet af børn. Og ingen virksomhed er så højt profileret som Al Gore, men som BuzzFeed Politics fortæller så er hans imperium også under afvikling, tynget af manglende interesse og Gore egen idioti

Richard Branson, James Cameron, Ted Turner, Tom Brokaw, and Tommy Lee Jones joined more than 100 other paying guests — Gore’s handpicked best and brightest — on the National Geographic Explorer, an ice-class 367-foot cruise ship, to see “up close and personal” the effects of a warming planet, courtesy of the former vice president’s environmental nonprofit, the Climate Reality Project. Singer Jason Mraz, another passenger aboard Gore’s Antarctic voyage, would later describe the trip on his blog as “a kind of floating symposium, much like the TED Talks series.”

Back in the more populated areas of the world, climate change activists snickered. The trip, and the Climate Reality Project, drew headlines but did little, they said privately, to affect the movement Gore hoped to revolutionize when he founded the group in 2006.

In the years since the Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the Nobel Peace Prize that followed made Gore the No. 1 climate change advocate in the world, the activist group he created with his fame has been steadily shrinking, as has its once-lofty mandate: to create a new nonpartisan global movement around climate change.

The numbers, according to a review of the nonprofit’s tax filings, show the change has been severe. In 2009, at its peak, Gore’s group had more than 300 employees, with 40 field offices across 28 states, and a serious war chest: It poured $28 million into advertising and promotion, and paid about $200,000 in lobbying fees at the height of the cap-and-trade energy bill fight on Capitol Hill.

Today, the group has just over 30 people on staff and has abandoned its on-the-ground presence — all of its field offices have since shut down — in favor of a far cheaper digital advocacy plan run out of Washington. Advertising expenses have decreased from the millions to the thousands, and the organization no longer lobbies lawmakers. Donations and grants have declined, too — from $87.4 million in 2008 to $17.6 million in 2011, and many of its high-profile donors have drifted away, one telling BuzzFeed she now sees the group’s initial vision as “very naïve.”

Interessen daler hele vejen rundt som troværdigheden krakelerer. Guardian skriver at en af FN’s klimapanels førende forskere Kevin Tentberth har mistet tilliden til at FN’s klimapanel overhovedet formår at løfte den ærværdige opgave det er grundløst at skræmme folk fra vid og sans

Other expert contributors to the IPCC reports said they believed it was time the panel shifted focus – from production of mega reports to more targeted studies, looking more closely at certain regions, or phenomena.

The IPCC was set up in 1988 to provide the most authoritative report on global climate change, enabling governments to prepare for a future of rising seas, droughts, extreme weather events, and other consequences.

It has delivered its landmark reports every six or seven years since then, relying on the participation of some 1,300 scientists from around the world to arrive at an expert consensus on the pace of climate change, and its effects.

The IPCC shared the Nobel peace prize with Al Gore in 2007. But in 2010, the UN climate panel was forced to admit there was an error in the report on the rate of retreat of Himalayan glaciers.

The error was in one paragraph in a 900-page report. But it was seized on by those who doubt the science behind climate change, and those who oppose controls on carbon pollution, to try to damage the credibility of the entire IPCC exercise.

Now, as the IPCC puts the finishing touches to the latest report, some of the climate scientists involved argue the mammoth effort of getting hundreds of scientists to review hundreds of journal articles – all on a volunteer basis – would be better put to studying regional impacts of climate change, or specific phenomena.

“I think myself that the IPCC has outgrown its usefulness in the way in which it does things,” said Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Colorado.

Andrew Weaver, a lead IPCC author and a Green party leader who earlier this year was elected to the British Columbia legislature, agreed it was time to shift away from the blockbuster style of reports.

The scientists said the science on the causes of climate change and its global effects was already well-established. Given the rate and extent of climate change, it would be more useful to governments which rely on the IPCC reports to have scientists working on more targeted reports on specific topics, which would be delivered every year or two.

Samme argumentation som fra muslimer og EU propagandister - Systemfejl løses med mere system. Og klimapanelets vigende indflydelse skyldtes ikke en enkelt fejl om Himalayas gletschere, som Guardian bilder sine læsere ind, men den lavine af andre fejl og groteskher som ikke blot selve fejlen, der var gravende, men det skandaløse forsøg på at dække over den, afstedkom. Donna Laframboise var en af de få journalister, der undrede sig over klimapanelets opførsel og hun begyndte at se deres værk efter i sømmene. Hun forklarer her i et interview, hvorfor klimapanelet er en skændsel i sin egen ret

2 Kommentarer »

  1. Næste IPCC science fiction raport er på trapperne, så befolkningen skal skræmmes med en “lækket” raport. JP giver gerne spalteplads til mesterværket.

    http://jyllands-posten.dk/international/ECE5926653/vandstanden-stiger-hurtigere-end-frygtet/

    Comment by Sailor — September 9, 2013 @ 6:20 pm
  2. Ja Sailor, men de er på røven.

    - “Despite the original forecasts, major climate research centres now accept that there has been a “pause” in global warming since 1997.

    The original predictions led to billions being invested in green measures to combat the effects of climate change.

    The changing predictions have led to the UN’s climate change’s body holding a crisis meeting, and the the IPCC is due to report on the situation in October. A pre-summit meeting will be held later this month.”

    Hvis nogen skulle være i tvivl om klimapanelets perspektiv: Aflysningen af Jordens undergang fører til et krisemøde.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html

    Comment by Drokles — September 10, 2013 @ 12:08 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress