Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
John Beardmore wrote:
In message , Orator
writes
John Beardmore wrote:
In message , Orator
writes
There is also the possibility that the sensitivity to greenhouse
gases is less than what most climate models indicate. Scientists
feel increase of 1degree F ( 0.5 degrees C) in 140 years is not
necessarily outside the range of natural climate variability."
Which ones ?
???
Which scientists ?
Does it matter? Isn't that a ridiculous request that has no value? Can
you name every AWG scientist?
Note the reference point differs, and starts from a different point!
This only shows a rise in temperature of 0.29 degrees C! An amount
NASA states is "not necessarily outside the range of natural climate
variability"!
Of course, when you put 10 "economists" in a room and tell them to
predict an outcome for a given scenario you invariably get 12 answers.
Hysteria, nothing but rampant hysteria in the Stern report!
Yes, though please tell us why NASA put the zero level where they
did, because they haven't put it where many academics do !
You pose questions directed at the various authors - ask them not me.
No - you are citing the NASA zero level as definitive, and as such it
appears to indicate less warming. As you regard the NASA graph as
definitive, I'm asking YOU why YOU think they put the zero level higher
than most other people who draw that graph ?
As I am not the person selecting the bogus "reference" points, then *I*
cannot state the authors reasoning.
I do not, and have never claimed the NASA ref. point to be "definitive",
so your attribution of that notion to me is totally false. I point to
the ridiculous situation of not having a reference point at all!
However, I can point to the bleeding obvious that is there for all to
see without me _needing_ to point them out.
1- We don't have a genuine mean global temperature. It doesn't exist.
2- The Stern figure is for a period 1750 to about 1850, giving an even
colder the "usual" mean than the one taken from near the end of the
Little Ice age at 1850 (NASA)!
|