Posted by: Grant | December 21, 2012

IPCC Leak In Washington – Times, Forbes, The Telegraph, IBD etc

Climate sensitivity low, alarmist sensitivity high
Posted on December 20, 2012
by Anthony Watts
Reactions are coming in worldwide worldwide to figureipcc-delegation-nobel-peace2 1.4 of the IPCC AR4 draft report. and the revelation that climate sensitivity is lower by aerosol analysis than the IPCC officially projects. Hotheads are blowing gaskets because the hot air just went out of their cause. William Connolley (with an e) gets the “blown head gasket award” for this round, see below.
First some op-eds:

Washington Times:  EDITORIAL: Chilling climate-change news

New leak shows predictions of planetary warming have been overstated.

Forbes: Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels: The UN’s Global Warming Forecasts Are Performing Very, Very Badly

Investors Business Daily: Climate Change Draft Undermines U.N.’s Claims

PowerLine: Climate Alarmism: The Beginning of the End?

Climate scientist Richard Betts thanks Nic Lewis for “constructive contribution” to climate sensitivity debate.

Media Matters: WSJ’s Climate “Dynamite” Is A Dud (citing the duds dudes at “Skeptical Science”)

The Telegraph, Delingpole: Global Warming? Not a snowball’s chance in hell

Climate Sensitivity, in relation to carbon dioxide, is simply how much the Earth will warm for a doubling of concentration of the gas in the atmosphere. Or how much our adding “carbon” to the air is actually going to raise the temperature.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: