It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Cynic
Climate Change s real. AGW is a man-concocted myth to scam the general population into thinking they can buy their way out through taxation, guilt trips and a small wealth transfer to the Third World.
If AGW is responsible then why should we allow others to belch out more of this substance. Simply refer to China, they have and are constructing more coal fired generation plants than Western countries and will be exempted or simply ignore their "obligations" to reduce emissions.
You can't have it both ways.
SloAnPainful
reply to post by 1104light
I at least laid out some facts for you to consider. All you have done is demand people to do research for you and provide numbers that are impossible to know the exact figures... I'm not wasting my time replying to your posts any longer.
-SAP-
You raise good talking points however their is a fundamental flaw in your rebuttal.
f AGW is causing Climate Change, why did the IPCC fudge their data - Cherry-Pick if you like to make Agenda 21 more believable than it actually is.
More importantly, why do ice core samples show a variation of about .1% in carbon emissions attributed in theory by man since the time of the Industrial Revolution?
IPCC data suggests the climate is changing, a fact not in dispute here, but now we are back to another Ice Age not a hotter planner as originally foretold. Again, they cannot have it both ways.
Most importantly in regard to the OP and the thread in general. The next IPCC report is likely to raise the alarm not lower it, but the typical denier bloggers and media outlets like the Daily Fail and WSJ are in spin mode trying to alter the tone quite sure that most of you think what you're reading is truth and won't bother looking at the report itself.
Overestimated global warming
Recent observed global warming is significantly less than that simulated by climate models. This
difference might be explained by some combination of errors in external forcing, model response and internal climate variability.
The inconsistency between observed and simulated global warming is even more striking for temperature trends computed over the past fifteen years (1998–2012). For this period, the observed trend of 0.05 ± 0.08 °C per decade is more than four times smaller than the average simulated trend of 0.21 ± 0.03 °C per decade.
It is worth noting that the observed trend over this period — not significantly different from zero — suggests a temporary hiatus’ in global warming. The divergence between observed and CMIP5-simulated global warming begins in the early 1990s, as can be seen when comparing observed and simulated running trends from 1970–2012.
What is it with your obsession to reduce the entire debate to a oversimplified propaganda battle, as if the only group of people raising serious and valid criticism of the IPCC's work, would be a bunch of denialists backed by Big Oil and the right wing media.
Cynic
reply to post by Kali74
To err is human. I respect the fact that you have erred and forgive you.
By ignoring today's Inconvenient Truths exposed recently which oppose Gore's position, you have obviously drank Al's Kool-Aid and are still downing it today.
You failed to address the other points mentioned in my post so I can only conclude that you are nothing more than an AGW proponent that doesn't know what they are spewing out about.
Continue to revel in your wrongness, you obviously enjoy being obtuse.
Also, could you explain why the Earth has entered a period of cooling and the IPCC is adjusting their theory to acknowledge such a fact? We are returning to original proposals from the 1960's that we are entering a mini ice age and not roasting due to planet wide warming.
Kali74
They aren't saying we're entering a period cooling and you will see as much when the actual report comes out... if you dare to read it for yourself that is.edit on 18-9-2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)