Am I imagining it or does the UN make press releases like this every couple of days now?

During the Cambrian era, CO2 levels were 20x current levels at 7000 ppm. Corals were evolving and abundant. The earth did not melt down. The oceans did not die. The planet did not turn into Venus. No tipping points - no idiotic GIGO climate models to trouble the coral.
http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Extension/fossils/coral.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png

Chris Landsea, the science officer at the National Hurricane Center quit the IPCC because of their insistence on claiming stronger and more frequent hurricanes - despite all evidence to the contrary.

Yes, temperatures and sea levels have been rising since the days when Chicago was 5000 ft. deep in ice. Should we scare school children?

All these predictions are based on immature climate models which can't accurately predict next week.

Why do you resist? We only wish to raise quality of life for all species. I am Locutus, of Borg. Resistance is futile. Your life as it has been, is over. From this time forward, you will service us.

Environmentalist brains being affected by breathing too much CO2.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/19/us/19collins.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=us

Some will now consider destroying the environment in order to save the world from evil carbon.

gotta say I'm skeptical of the below based on a whole bevy of paleoclimate studies, some done this very year:

"Tropical cyclone intensity has increased over the past 30 years and this correlates to increases in tropical sea surface temperatures." and
"--Expect more frequent and severe tropical cyclones and heat waves."

I could have sworn they moved away from this when Dr. Chris Landsea quit. What happened to "there's no concrete link between global warming and tropical cyclone numbers and intensity"? This was what they were using up until, now I guess, and most of the world's meteorological organizations were doing the same.

But I bet this will get called fact, and anyone who attempts to say otherwise (even when using their vaunted SCIENCE to do so) will be up against the wall, just like how they fairly successfully removed the Medieval Warm Period's global impact from the record. It's why and how I became a skeptic, and remain so. We shall see, IPCC, we shall see.

Unbelievable !!! In every sense of the word. Since when did science depend on negociation as this report says.

Unbelievable that so called intelleigent people could make statements like this.

Unbelievable that the head of a world organisation could fly over the Antartic when it is at maximum ice over and declare it depleted of ice.

Unbelievably stupid !! If anyone believes this rubbish.

When oh when we will see some Real Science !!!

Everyone can see the climate is changing and PROBABLY always has but this adulterated science is totally unforgivable.

This "over the top" hysterical warning needs to be viewed in light of the UN call for a binding agreement to stabilize CO2 by 2015 and then reduce it from there.

The last prediction I heard from the "Sun is the Cause" team, was a cooling trend begining in 2020 (ish) and continuing for 30 years or so.

It seem to me that the IPCC is taking that prediction seriously. They need to scare the masses into action now so that when the cooling begins in 2020 they can take credit for it.
In the mean time, they will have achieved their primary goal of social revolution.

Be prepared for all manor of wild stories and warnings of doom leading up to the next Kyoto style meetings.

So predictable.....

you know i agree terry- with the hurricanes- there have always been intense hurricanes- take the great galvasten hurricane- lets also not forget the labor day hurricanes ect. what hurricanes need to grow- little wind shear- strong convection, warm waters, etc. just like i heard a few people try to relate tornado intensities to global warming- again-not possible- tornados need adequate moisture, strong deep layer shear, a lifting mechinism, and decent instability- such as cape values around 500 and above, and helcity values >150 m^s 2^2 - you know you can blame global warming for ever phenomenon

Global warming-----A lot of political CRAP!!!!

It is extremely dishonest to mention sea level rise, without qualifying it with the fact that sea level would rise nearly as much even if all fossil fuel burning was immediately stopped. The reason being that many people are inclined to take drastic action to try to stop something which they have no control over.

The summary reads like it is intended to scam gullible people into giving their money away to the UN. These people should be selling used cars, not making policy.

The IPCC report claims that man-made global warming has increased the frequency and severity of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Well, not according to a new study previewed today in World Climate Report. The researchers looked at actual data in Europe (Northern Hemisphere), not computer models, and came up with some pretty strong evidence that the IPCC's findings are simply wrong.

From World Climate Report (paraphrased):
The researchers used barometric pressure readings from which they calcualted the resulting
"geostrophic wind" achieving a balance between the pressure gradient and the Coriolis Effect; the basic dynamic principles work today, they worked 100 years ago, and they will work tomorrow.
They concluded, "that storminess has not significantly changed over the past 200 years."

Here is a link to the full article:
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2007/11/19/changes-in-european-storminess/#more-285

Thanks for the link Rick! Brett

A key part of this report is the explanation that we must act now to prevent potentially dramatic or irreversible changes. The IPCC is a governmental body and this report had to be vetted through politicians in the many counties that participate; it is the most conservative body on climate change. We must act now.

Would it not be better to do something about it and find out you're wrong, then to not do anything and find out it's too late?

Precautionary Principle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle

-Mike

Patrick Henry

You are absolutely correct. We will not "kill the earth." Whatever temperatures we push the earth too, life will adapt and thrive. It is entirely possible that a warmer earth may have more life, as warmer temperatures generally allow higher net primary productivities. Human civilization, however, has so far thrived only during a holocene type climate. So there is a real danger that a modest increase in temperatures may destabilize the climate, making it more difficult for the human population to thrive at population levels as are now current. It is also possible that the human species may be better off in a warmer world. The problem is, is we're just not sure. We are playing with fire. We may get burnt. But if we caused disaster for ourselves, or even caused our own extinction (a very unlikely event) other life forms will evolve and adapt. That is all.

I give, who pays these people to write this stuff?

And more importantly, since the predictions (future) seem to echo recent hollywood cinematic efforts, who wrote this stuff and are they scabs since I understand that the writers are on strike?

It appears that the writers union has a basis for legal action.

The predictions sound like a good movie except, d'oh, it's already been done. Maybe they could
do a sequel with Gore on the mount, Leonardo as the silly weather geek coming to the rescue of the girl in distress, Daryl Hannah.

LOL, seriously who writes this stuff?

Are those "W"s on the back of your SUVs? I am a skeptic too, but the stakes are too high not to take action. I listen to both side and the Anti side seem to be rather extreme and preachy ,and not the "pure" scientist they profess to be.

Just a few points about the report.
1.Tropical cyclone intensity has increased over the past 30 years and this correlates to increases in tropical sea surface temperatures.

Increased over what? Measuring hurricane intensity in the past was far more difficult than today. My question would be, how much more intense are the storms today that make landfall? Measuring the pressure of storms over the ocean in the past was in many ways impossible.

2.Most of the warming will be over land and at most high northern latitudes.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a warming Antarctica a major component of AGW in the past?Now that it doesn't fit into the plan it's conspicuously absent. The fact that much of the continent has cooled needs to be explained. It hasn't been.

3.Expect more frequent and severe tropical cyclones and heat waves.

A few years ago we heard the dire predictions about hurricanes. The last two years have had fewer storms than average. Why? I know last year they came out with the infamous wind shear excuse. Sorry, it just seems too convenient. Again, in the past, how many storms went unreported? Unless they made landfall or crossed shipping lanes they would have gone unreported. I know for some on this site William Gray is one step from the Alzheimer clinic. Sorry, I'm not buying it. If he was supporting AGW claims he'd be cited as an expert on the subject. I believe what he has to say needs to be considered, but again, it doesn't fit into the plan.

No need to worry about rising sea levels and all the effects the warming will cause if we build my "TUNNELS". If not then we are doomed. I have told you scientists this now for many years and still you refuse to model the TUNNEL idea.When are you scientists going to listen to me?

Patrick Henry,

So, if you mine the cadmium for the solar panels somewhere else, you're ok with that? Just don't mine uranium, or anything else for that matter, in my backyard.

I'm pretty sure we could find some decent zinc, copper, and cadmium deposits along the Front Range. I'm sure the folks down in Boulder, Clear Creek, Summit, and Park counties wouldn't mind increasing the copper and zinc production or reopen some old mines to produce more cadmium for the solar panels. Or maybe we should just buy the cadmium from overseas instead of being self-sufficient, which by the way, we pretty much already are.

Heh, I guess they use so many computer models that they cannot read paleoclimate papers anymore.

My favorite is the approval by the UCS. Way too many scientific blunders by them. I think the last time I even bothered with anything they said was the five years in a row that they predicted a technological stopper to SDI. Of course, their predictions were totally wrong each year as the "stopper" was removed. Took them five tries to learn their lesson, not too bright. Oh yes, I loved Carl Sagan in that dustup, he personally endorsed the study that "proved" it would cost too much to deploy the space based ABM systems and proved he had forgotten everything he ever knew about orbital mechanics.

The UN...Useless Notions.

The UN that brought us 18 toothless resolutions against Saddam. The UN that gave us a corrupt oil for food program and then tried to cover it up. And you thought Haliburton was bad? The UN that allowed Somalia, Haiti and Darfur to allow countless human atrocities. Oh, but they care dont they? The UN blames America for its CO2 emmissions. Because of us, the poorest countries in the world are going to suffer the most. Woman and children will be hit the hardest. See they do care. They can save the world if they can get America to fork over its money.

Like we dont do enough. We are the most generous country on earth. Its the same crap every day from these clowns. They dont give a crap about American concerns.

They need to pack their bags and get the hell out of our country. Go bitch and moan to the Europeans. The Chicoms, Russians and Indians are NOT going to sacrifice their economy for your stupid AGW theory. Why should we?

If Hillary wins though, we will sacrifice. She is sold on AGW. Who was her husbands vice president? Oh ya, the loudest piper of all, Al Gore. Hillary and Al are AGW buddies. Remember the planted question that she got criticised for? It was about AGW. They had to plant it. Quite the scheme they have going on. Bush got rich on oil. Will these libs get rich on AGW?

I like how they are making up new things as they go along. Now its northern latitude global warming mainly. What a bunch of bull stuffs. (Reminds me of a little kid playing a game and making up new rules as he goes along so he can win.)

What is actually very frightening is the economic devastation these charlatans are trying to inflict through political action. Giving governments vast new powers to tax and control people's lives in the name of "fighting climate change" is the biggest fraud since socialism.

I give IPCC all the credit in the world for at least making fence sitters take notice. Every environmental cause should have such a mechanism for churning out science to overcome and overwhelm the skeptics. I noticed that this past weekend the biodiversity camp is getting closer to its own version of IPCC, only they call it IMoSEB. I've summarized the report in my frog blog, and the link to the report is in there, too: http://frogmatters.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/can-this-acronym-do-for-biodiversity-what-ipcc-has-done-for-global-warming/

Guess they have given up the subtle approach, eh! Predictions of this magnitude dictate that you thoroughly understand all the factors that go into the equation. With something as complex as climate, and with all the potential variables, both known and unknown, it is beyond hubris to expect to know all the inter-relationships and dependencies that must be known before understanding a system enough to make even short-term predictions. It becomes farcical when you extrapolate these variables over decades into the future. The UN would better serve their agenda by focusing on economic drivers for alternative fuels. Scare tactics will not drive change.

Paul,

There are more efficient solar technologies which do not involve photo-voltaics. Yes I will do everything I can to stop Uranium, oil shale and heavy metal mining in the Rockies. As a matter of fact I just got back from a meeting to that end. They were thrilled to have a hard core right-winger on their side. ;^)

cmbclean,

Remember that natural selection does not favor the strongest nor the smartest, but rather the most adaptable.

This is nothing but scare tactics and no one seems to buy it. Why not one of the people who responded to it belive it and frankly hat is how it should be. earth is 4.6 billion years old. bet the UN doesn't even know that or forgot about that fact.

Rick Ressler - "The IPCC report claims that man-made global warming has increased the frequency and severity of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years." I don't think that the regions considered in the study you link to (Northwestern Europe, Northern Europe, and Central Europe) are considered tropical.