According to a story in the Huff Post:
UN Climate Change Report Draft Warns Of 3 Foot Sea Level Rise By 2100
Editorial updates 12/22/2014
The story (of a "leaked" UN report draft) blames human released green house gases for at least 50% of the temperature rise that is, the UN believes, causing polar ice melt and the consequent ocean rise. We could not find their explanation for the other 50%. The study presumes that reduction in the man caused green house gases will reduce global temperatures but asserts that at best we might reduce global warming by 50% and only experience a 1.5 foot rise by the end of the century. Scary sounding isn't? We thought we better ask the catfish: Editor's note: Since publication of this article we have found and published data that indicates that global warming had ceased and temperatures were actually steady state for nearly 16 years prior the solar flare activity of two years ago which NOAA predicted would cause several years of colder than average winters, two of which are now past and a third is in progress. Ice cover in both the Arctic and Antarctic was reported as increasing during the winter seasons of the last two years. We also recently reported that the roughly once a decade event known as the Atlantic Ocean Temperature Inversion had occurred, cooling Atlantic Ocean surface water temperatures which usually has a cooling effect on the global climate. Actual global average temperatures are presently falling. We have no idea why NOAA, Universities, and others publish conflicting data. Such sources have published the news about global cooling without fanfare, then published predictions that the earth is warming and predicting tragic events as a result. To understand why we suggest that you follow the money. Money is being committed to operations in the High Arctic by governments and industry that are dependent on melting ice. Certain nations benefit from the climate change fear in the U.S. which has resulted in job transfers to third world nations with no emissions limitations. The decision makers are hoping that after this long pause in temperature rise and the so far short drop in average temperatures that the temperature will continue to rise ( for those betting on ice reduction) or that the jobs and technology transfers out of the United States will continue for a while.
His Eminent Catfishness, Former Japanese Demigod, Maritime Analyst, Rock Album Cover Model, Animated Feature Film Star, Personification of Forces of Nature, and Dean of the Namazu School of Climatology .......NAMAZU!
Namazu: Uh,,,,thank you Johnas for the introduction I would say that you are too kind, but I know you were just being a wise ass. Trust me you don't want to know what my fans did in ancient Japan to people who mocked the Namazu. But that was then and this now I'm out of the demigod business and trying to build a new audience, which you by the way will no doubt profit from, so a little respect is in order.
Johnas Presbyter: OK Namazu you're right, I'm sorry. But what do you make of this latest UN report?
Namazu: Well we could deconstruct the science beginning with the fact that trend is rarely fact 100 years down the line. The leaked UN study made no mention of small sampling error or the other variables in such forecasting. Its difficult to be constructively critical of a "leaked" supposedly scientific report. But we did notice that the climate change lobby has blasted the leaked draft as too conservative, they want a more dismal picture painted. More noticeable is the fact that in order to get to this "too conservative" finding the UN ignored certain key facts in their presentation. It is very true that the global temperature has risen since 1951 as they state in their leaked draft report. They fail to mention that for the past few years it has actually been falling. It has not fallen below 1951 levels but the most recent trend is down. But again trend isn't future fact. We don't know what this winter will bring much less what the global average temperature trend will be over the next 60 years. But we see no real benefit in being critical of anybody's climate report even when there may be a political agenda vice science behind it.
At the Namazu School we believe the most important singular fact about climate is that it changes, that's what climates do. More over climates have changed in the past very dramatically and very suddenly due to natural causes that we can't control such as meteor strikes, hyperactive periods of volcanic activity, planetary axis wobble, ocean current changes, planet orbital changes, or any combination of these causes about which we can do nothing. So even if we believe that the UN is playing Chicken Little for General Assembly political reasons its all to the good if the United States and others raise their coastal city flood prevention infrastructure another 3 to 6 feet. How many times now have governments underestimated 100 and 500 year flood cycles?
Johnas Prebyster: But your catfishness you didn't mention anything about us lowering green house gas emissions.
Namazu: Johnas you are the chief editor don't you read the posts you publish? If the "us" you are talking about is the U.S., as in the United States of America, we have already reduced green house gas emissions and continue to do so. As reported in your own pages last year the United States reduced its green house gas emissions by 2%. That may not sound like much but the U.S. has been steadily reducing such emissions since the 1970s. Our overall emissions by now are probably down by 30 to 50% or more from 1951 levels. Unfortunately last year, squeaky clean and Kyoto signatory Canada increased emissions by 1%. Of all the Kyoto signatory nations only one small European nation reduced emissions as much as the United states percentage wise. Meanwhile China, India, Brazil, and others maintain that global warming is a developed nation problem and all of the burden of emission reduction should fall on the United States, Canada, Japan, and Western Europe. So while we are busy reducing emissions and sending manufacturing jobs off to these nations their smoke stack industries are going full tilt. If in fact, green house gases are driving climate change as a nation we are doing more than any other nation to reduce our own emissions. But we are powerless to control China, India, Brazil and the others who have asserted a right to pollute as much as necessary to complete the transfer of wealth from the United States to themselves. So if the climate truly is changing to any degree near the UN's latest estimate "we" as in the United States can do nothing since we are already doing all that we can but can't control the other nations undermining the effort.
Johnas Presbyter: So what is the "UN General Assembly "political issue" you mentioned and how does it affect UN climate pronouncements?
Namazu: China is the only permanent Security Counsel member who benefits from all of the export of manufacturing jobs from the United States , the other beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries are in the General Assembly. Any indication that the climate isn't in a free fall makes their case for the immediate transfer of smoke stack industry from the United States to their nations seem less imperative. The overwhelming vast majority of the nations in the General Assembly and some of the Security Counsel are very resentful of the United States. It would be very impolitic of any UN official not to support anti American agendas. After all the U.S. has taken it on the chin for years in the UN without running them out of New York or even saying much in its own defense. But the General Assembly members can be very vocal and are expert at internal UN politics. The safe course for UN bureaucrats is always anti American and the climate issue presents all sorts of opportunities to transfer wealth from the United States to other places. However these efforts by the various nations are all pointless in the long run. As we predicted in these pages months ago by 2045 manufacturing for the U.S. market will be almost exclusively done in the United States thanks to the evolution of 3 D printing virtually eliminating raw material wastage , most of the labor involved, and most of the transportation costs associated with the manufacture of everything from paper towels to automobiles.
China, India, Brazil and the others clamoring for more of our manufacturing hides will be the owners of the 2045 "rust belts". The fact is manufacturing in the United States is on the rise. It is starting to come back to us for the same reason it left. It is now cheaper to operate here thanks to new labor saving technologies and the natural reduction in transportation costs. This is the second time you've heard it here folks manufacturing is going clean, green, and local by mid century. That leaves the automotive, surface transportation industries as the future major emitters. Yet, every year automotive emissions go down and gas mileage goes up in the United States. This is of course not true everywhere but the inescapable prognosis is that despite the lack of cooperation by the real polluters and the finger pointing at the United States, by mid century forces that have nothing to do with government or UN regulation are going to cut our green house emissions down to traces compared to current levels. So if we are going to beat the emissions problem by mid century without the ongoing manufactured political panic, why would end of century predictions based on simply extending past trends (remember the current trend is an actual fall in global temperatures) be expected to be accurate?
Johnas Presbyter:. But earlier you said the UN prediction might be a good thing and that you didn't want to debunk it, but you just cast serious doubt on it. Why, if its inaccurate and unreliable, is there any good in it?
NAMAZU: Its good because many people will believe it like gospel and that will have no effect on further wealth transfers out of the United States over this issue the market and technological development is already starting to reverse that trend. So the fear of a three foot rise in water level could fuel a drive in the United States to improve the integrity of the flood protection infrastructure for our coastal cities. For example the brand new flood protection infrastructure for post Katrina New Orleans is based on a 100 year storm surge. That 100 year storm occurred about three times last century. The Dutch by contrast build for a 500 year surge. So we are under built in this area already. Improving the our coastal city flood prevention infrastructure to accommodate a 3 foot rise that doesn't happen would be a major improvement but probably still not bring American coastal cities up to the level of protection the Dutch see as routine. On the other hand over the next 87 years sea level could suddenly rise far more than 3 feet due to any of several natural causes that we can't predict or do anything to avoid. People aren't listening to the Namazu school's voice of common sense that climates change and can change suddenly and dramatically and that we should be prepared for that in terms of food production, and distribution, and flood protection among other areas of climate change readiness. If Chicken little politically hacked propaganda does it for the electorate rather than cold solid scientific reasoning, so be it. There is life saving work to be done, whatever spurs it on is OK by the Namazu School but we deal in facts. Climates change, that's what they do .....be ready.
Meanwhile if you would like to read the story that set this interview off here is a lead in and a link:
His Eminent Catfishness, Former Japanese Demigod, Maritime Analyst, Rock Album Cover Model, Animated Feature Film Star, Personification of Forces of Nature, and Dean of the Namazu School of Climatology .......NAMAZU!
Namazu: Uh,,,,thank you Johnas for the introduction I would say that you are too kind, but I know you were just being a wise ass. Trust me you don't want to know what my fans did in ancient Japan to people who mocked the Namazu. But that was then and this now I'm out of the demigod business and trying to build a new audience, which you by the way will no doubt profit from, so a little respect is in order.
Johnas Presbyter: OK Namazu you're right, I'm sorry. But what do you make of this latest UN report?
Namazu: Well we could deconstruct the science beginning with the fact that trend is rarely fact 100 years down the line. The leaked UN study made no mention of small sampling error or the other variables in such forecasting. Its difficult to be constructively critical of a "leaked" supposedly scientific report. But we did notice that the climate change lobby has blasted the leaked draft as too conservative, they want a more dismal picture painted. More noticeable is the fact that in order to get to this "too conservative" finding the UN ignored certain key facts in their presentation. It is very true that the global temperature has risen since 1951 as they state in their leaked draft report. They fail to mention that for the past few years it has actually been falling. It has not fallen below 1951 levels but the most recent trend is down. But again trend isn't future fact. We don't know what this winter will bring much less what the global average temperature trend will be over the next 60 years. But we see no real benefit in being critical of anybody's climate report even when there may be a political agenda vice science behind it.
At the Namazu School we believe the most important singular fact about climate is that it changes, that's what climates do. More over climates have changed in the past very dramatically and very suddenly due to natural causes that we can't control such as meteor strikes, hyperactive periods of volcanic activity, planetary axis wobble, ocean current changes, planet orbital changes, or any combination of these causes about which we can do nothing. So even if we believe that the UN is playing Chicken Little for General Assembly political reasons its all to the good if the United States and others raise their coastal city flood prevention infrastructure another 3 to 6 feet. How many times now have governments underestimated 100 and 500 year flood cycles?
Johnas Prebyster: But your catfishness you didn't mention anything about us lowering green house gas emissions.
Namazu: Johnas you are the chief editor don't you read the posts you publish? If the "us" you are talking about is the U.S., as in the United States of America, we have already reduced green house gas emissions and continue to do so. As reported in your own pages last year the United States reduced its green house gas emissions by 2%. That may not sound like much but the U.S. has been steadily reducing such emissions since the 1970s. Our overall emissions by now are probably down by 30 to 50% or more from 1951 levels. Unfortunately last year, squeaky clean and Kyoto signatory Canada increased emissions by 1%. Of all the Kyoto signatory nations only one small European nation reduced emissions as much as the United states percentage wise. Meanwhile China, India, Brazil, and others maintain that global warming is a developed nation problem and all of the burden of emission reduction should fall on the United States, Canada, Japan, and Western Europe. So while we are busy reducing emissions and sending manufacturing jobs off to these nations their smoke stack industries are going full tilt. If in fact, green house gases are driving climate change as a nation we are doing more than any other nation to reduce our own emissions. But we are powerless to control China, India, Brazil and the others who have asserted a right to pollute as much as necessary to complete the transfer of wealth from the United States to themselves. So if the climate truly is changing to any degree near the UN's latest estimate "we" as in the United States can do nothing since we are already doing all that we can but can't control the other nations undermining the effort.
Johnas Presbyter: So what is the "UN General Assembly "political issue" you mentioned and how does it affect UN climate pronouncements?
Namazu: China is the only permanent Security Counsel member who benefits from all of the export of manufacturing jobs from the United States , the other beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries are in the General Assembly. Any indication that the climate isn't in a free fall makes their case for the immediate transfer of smoke stack industry from the United States to their nations seem less imperative. The overwhelming vast majority of the nations in the General Assembly and some of the Security Counsel are very resentful of the United States. It would be very impolitic of any UN official not to support anti American agendas. After all the U.S. has taken it on the chin for years in the UN without running them out of New York or even saying much in its own defense. But the General Assembly members can be very vocal and are expert at internal UN politics. The safe course for UN bureaucrats is always anti American and the climate issue presents all sorts of opportunities to transfer wealth from the United States to other places. However these efforts by the various nations are all pointless in the long run. As we predicted in these pages months ago by 2045 manufacturing for the U.S. market will be almost exclusively done in the United States thanks to the evolution of 3 D printing virtually eliminating raw material wastage , most of the labor involved, and most of the transportation costs associated with the manufacture of everything from paper towels to automobiles.
China, India, Brazil and the others clamoring for more of our manufacturing hides will be the owners of the 2045 "rust belts". The fact is manufacturing in the United States is on the rise. It is starting to come back to us for the same reason it left. It is now cheaper to operate here thanks to new labor saving technologies and the natural reduction in transportation costs. This is the second time you've heard it here folks manufacturing is going clean, green, and local by mid century. That leaves the automotive, surface transportation industries as the future major emitters. Yet, every year automotive emissions go down and gas mileage goes up in the United States. This is of course not true everywhere but the inescapable prognosis is that despite the lack of cooperation by the real polluters and the finger pointing at the United States, by mid century forces that have nothing to do with government or UN regulation are going to cut our green house emissions down to traces compared to current levels. So if we are going to beat the emissions problem by mid century without the ongoing manufactured political panic, why would end of century predictions based on simply extending past trends (remember the current trend is an actual fall in global temperatures) be expected to be accurate?
Johnas Presbyter:. But earlier you said the UN prediction might be a good thing and that you didn't want to debunk it, but you just cast serious doubt on it. Why, if its inaccurate and unreliable, is there any good in it?
NAMAZU: Its good because many people will believe it like gospel and that will have no effect on further wealth transfers out of the United States over this issue the market and technological development is already starting to reverse that trend. So the fear of a three foot rise in water level could fuel a drive in the United States to improve the integrity of the flood protection infrastructure for our coastal cities. For example the brand new flood protection infrastructure for post Katrina New Orleans is based on a 100 year storm surge. That 100 year storm occurred about three times last century. The Dutch by contrast build for a 500 year surge. So we are under built in this area already. Improving the our coastal city flood prevention infrastructure to accommodate a 3 foot rise that doesn't happen would be a major improvement but probably still not bring American coastal cities up to the level of protection the Dutch see as routine. On the other hand over the next 87 years sea level could suddenly rise far more than 3 feet due to any of several natural causes that we can't predict or do anything to avoid. People aren't listening to the Namazu school's voice of common sense that climates change and can change suddenly and dramatically and that we should be prepared for that in terms of food production, and distribution, and flood protection among other areas of climate change readiness. If Chicken little politically hacked propaganda does it for the electorate rather than cold solid scientific reasoning, so be it. There is life saving work to be done, whatever spurs it on is OK by the Namazu School but we deal in facts. Climates change, that's what they do .....be ready.
Meanwhile if you would like to read the story that set this interview off here is a lead in and a link:
"A leaked draft of the U.N.'s next major climate change report warns that global sea levels could rise more than three feet by the end of the century if greenhouse emissions continue unabated, The New York Times reported Monday.
The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) report is also more confident that human activities, like the burning of fossil fuels, are the chief cause of the atmospheric warming seen since the 1950s. The report's authors say it is at least 95 percent likely that humans are behind this warming, according to an initial report from Reuters last Friday.
This confidence is reflected in the study's language. It's "extremely likely" that humans caused "more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010," the Times quoted from the draft report.
The IPCC outlines several sea level rise scenarios for the end of the century, based on efforts to limit emissions in the coming decades. The most optimistic emissions reductions could bring only a 10-inch rise, explains the Times, on top of the eight inches seen in the last century. If emissions continue at a runaway pace, sea levels could rise "at least 21 inches by 2100 and might rise a bit more than three feet."
No comments:
Post a Comment