So, who is correct? John Kerry a non-scientist who is presumably getting his information from the IPCC or the IPCC who ignores their own science reports and links a typhoon to global warming? This is really the IPCC battling with itself. Has Kerry read the AR5 SPM and remembers the following conclusion?
“Low confidence” that damaging increases will occur in either drought or tropical cyclone activity (SPM-23, Table SPM.1).
In other words, man made climate change has not affected tropical cyclone frequency or intensity.
But Kerry has drunk the man made climate change kool-aid as he offers aid to Vietnamese farmers and fishermen to combat climate change. Kerry believes CC is real even though individual events can’t be linked to CO2. Apparently, the 4-7 inches of sea level rise expected by 2100 is too much adaptation for the Vietnamese to manage by themselves. Whether the Vietnamese farmers and fishermen believe in man made climate change or not for $17 million of US taxpayer money they are willing to buy into the meme. You can buy as much agreement as you are willing to pay for. Mother Nature stopped raising the global mean temperature 17 years ago. No doubt Kerry feels no remorse at the expenditure of US taxpayer money to perpetuate a delusion.
'Kerry pledged $17 million to a program that will help the region's rice producers, shrimp and crab farmers and fisherman adapt to potential changes caused by higher sea levels that bring salt water into the delicate ecosystem.'
UHI stands for the Urban Heat Island effect. Back in 1989, the year after James Hansen declared the climate change games open, US data did not show any warming.
And yet back in 1907 scientists seemed to be quite aware of UHI See the link above.
Mr Hansen couldn’t explain the missing heat that was predicted to arise from the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere back in 1989 when US data did not show any upward trend in temperature.
Climate scientists 25 years later are once again looking for the missing heat that has been promised by their global climate models.
Perhaps because climate change is cyclical and CO2 has nothing to do with it?
No comments:
Post a Comment