Categories: Need to know

Calming down about the economy?

Resume global warming anxiety

by macleans.ca on Thursday, May 21, 2009 9:59am - 4 Comments

Now that the Conference Board has declared that Canadian consumers feel the economy has bottomed out, perhaps its time to devote some attention to other fears. Just in time to fill the gloom vacuum, the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology’s world-leading climate change model offers some troubling new projections. MIT model’s uniquely takes into account the economy, the atmosphere, the oceans, and life on earth. It’s new forecast indicates a median probability of surface warming of 5.2 degrees by 2100. And that’s up from a median projected warming in the 2003 MIT study of 2.4 degrees.

MIT

wayne moores

What happened? Wasn’t it just last week that the doomsday senario of melting icecaps, sea levels rising 50 feet, South Sea Atolles being swamped next year if not already(whoops, that was an Al Gore whooper), had been wildly exagerated? Well, no sense letting an inconvienient truth like a total economic collaspe around the world, curtailing burning of fossil fuels better than any carbon tax(boondollge) could, stand in the way of another hysterical fundraiser by phoney groups like Greenpeice or some university lab looking for billions in research grants from politicians desperate to look “green”. Cheers
Wayne

I dare anyone out there – find a commonly held idea by scientists a 100 years ago with a projection in years and then tell me how it worked out?

MM

I dare global warming deniers to debate an issue on presented facts than on their “touchstone” arguments.

I don’t pretend to know it all, but I don’t dismiss a study from MIT out-of-hand that tried to take into account all factors because I have a pre-made decision that global warming is a myth because, err….what is your reason? As a non-scientist, why are you able to automatically dismiss the consensus of 80-90 percent of scientists to believe 10% (who, btw, recience grant too, just from different sources)?

am quite confident that if you look at the theories of the 10% of scientists the last 100 years, you’d be in fringe territory, not accurate territory. Maybe 300 years ago you’d have a point, but not in the modern era.

If I’m wrong, if you can provide arguemtn

Rob H

Ya, I guess that study showing Antarctic ice over the whole continent has been growing for the past 30 years and the fact the Arctic ocean ice is currently at a 30 year average for this time of year, and that the earth has cooled over the last ten years, not warmed up, doesn’t mean anything. Just use the bogus data from IPCC, massage, and come up with a new doomsday. Couldn’t be because surveys are showing the average person isn’t buying the warming crisis hysteria (oops, “science”).
You are right though, 80 to 90 percent of scientists who got government climate study grants believe in global warming. Hmmm…..
When the famous IPCC “hockey stick” graph was proven to be false the IPCC response was “well ya, maybe, but the other studies show the climate warming so it doesn’t matter”.