Bernie, Gaye, and Peter have it all figured out…

October 28th, 2007
Politics, Vermont, climate change, global warming

From the Burlington Free Press:

 

“But global warming doesn’t come down to what you want versus what I want,” Sanders said. “It comes down to physics and chemistry. Scientists are telling us that global warming is already causing us significant problems and, if we don’t take bold action, the planet could suffer catastrophic problems impacting billions of people.”

 

and here:

 

“Democratic legislative leaders pointed to the first sentence of the report (Governor’s Commission on Climate Change) and said it reinforces their emphasis on the issue of climate change, for which Douglas has criticized them. “The climate change crisis may represent the most important and comprehensive challenge of our lifetime,” the report says.”

 

The real problem, boys and girls, is that all of these problems and challenges are based on a scientific consensus of opinion, not facts.

 

 

 

With the Nobel Peace Prize going to Al Gore and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), virtually, if not all of the “scientific consensus” relies on either Al Gore or the IPCC Reports, the most recent being AR4.

 

If you would rather go with the flow and join the consensus of opinion – then don’t take the time to read this paper, as we are sure you have spent your reading efforts on a careful examination of the 1056 page IPCC Report.

 

So here’s a quick overview:

 

“In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group One, a panel of experts established by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, issued its Fourth Assessment Report. The Report included predictions of dramatic increases in average world temperatures over the next 92 years and serious harm resulting from the predicted temperature increases. Using forecasting principles as our guide we asked: Are these forecasts a good basis for developing public policy? Our answer is “no”.

…

We found enough information to make judgments on 89 out of a total of 140 forecasting principles. The forecasting procedures that were described violated 72 principles. Many of the violations were, by themselves, critical.

…

The forecasts in the Report were not the outcome of scientific procedures. In effect, they were the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing. Research on forecasting has shown that experts’ predictions are not useful. We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts of global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder. ”

 

 

(from: Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts* ; Version 69 – 20 September, 2007 ;Kesten C. Green, Business and Economic Forecasting Unit, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia. Contact: PO Box 10800, Wellington 6143, New Zealand. kesten@kestencgreen.com; T +64 4 976 3245; F +64 4 976 3250

J. Scott Armstrong†, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

747 Huntsman, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.

armstrong@wharton.upenn.edu )

 

(Thanks to Climateaudit.org)

Tags: Bernie Sanders, climate change, Gaye Symington, global warming, Peter Shumlin

Trackback URL.