Climate change study had 'significant error': experts

[^_^ 5,021]

A climate change study that projected a 2.4 degree Celsius increase in temperature and massive worldwide food shortages in the next decade was seriously flawed, scientists said Wednesday.

...

Climate scientist Ray Weymann told AFP that the "study contains a significant error in that it confuses 'equilibrium' temperature rise with 'transient temperature rise.'"

He also noted that study author Hisas was told of the problems in advance of the report's release.

"The author of the study was told by several of us about this error but she said it was too late to change it," said Weymann.

Scientist Scott Mandia forwarded to AFP an email he said he sent to Hisas ahead of publication explaining why her figures did not add up, and noting that it would take "quite a few decades" to reach a warming level of 2.4 degrees Celsius.

"Even if we assume the higher end of the current warming rate, we should only be 0.2C warmer by 2020 than today," Mandia wrote.

"To get to +2.4C the current trend would have to immediately increase almost ten-fold."

Mandia described the mishap as an "honest and common mistake," but said the matter would certainly give fuel to skeptics of humans' role in climate change.

"More alarmism," said Mandia. "Don't get me wrong. We are headed to 2.4, it is just not going to happen in 2020."

...

Marshall Hoffman of the public relations firm that issued the report on the UEF's behalf said the group stands by the study.

"Earlier, NASA and NOAA estimated that the global temperature increased one degree from 2005-2010. If this stays on the same path, that will be two degrees by 2015. We see that path increasing more rapidly," Hoffman said, in part, in his explanation.

Asked for comment on Hoffman's response, Mandia told AFP: "He is still confused."

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-climate-significant-error-experts.html

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There's nothing on the AAAS's own website regarding this.

From their website:

Between 1990 and 2100, if emissions continue to increase, temperatures are expected to rise between 2 and 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 to 6.4 degrees Celsius). Since 1880, average global temperatures have increased by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 Celsius), according to a January 2010 report by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Over the past three decades, average global temperatures have climbed about 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit (0.2 degrees Celsius) per decade.

Scientists at the Alaska Climate Research Center have found that average temperatures there have increased by 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.9 degrees Celsius) over the last five decades and by 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit (3.5 degrees Celsius) over the winters.

The 1990s had been listed as the warmest decade ever recorded—until January 2010, when scientists reported that the global average temperatures in the first decade of the 21st century were even higher.

.....

As 2009 ended, the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide—resulting mostly from the human activities of deforestation and burning fossil fuels—stood at 389 ppm. Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are rising at a rate of about 2 ppm per year, and therefore could hit 400 ppm with this decade. Some scientists have said that average temperatures could jump by as much as 4 degrees Fahrenheit (about 2.2 degrees Celsius) if the atmospheric CO2 reaches 450 ppm. We may face even more dangerous impacts at 550 ppm, and above that level, potentially devastating events. U.S. crop productivity would be affected, while and communities in some regions might suffer increased fatalities because of intensely hot summers.

http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/climate_change/climate_change_qa.shtml?sa_campaign=Internal_Ads%2fAAAS%2fhome_page%2f2010-05-26%2fhighlights

[^_^ 5,021]

There's nothing on the AAAS's own website regarding this.

Of course not. Let the scrubbing of history begin. I was never wrong because I control the record of what I said. How convenient. How completely consistent with the style of the global warming pushers.

Edited January 20, 2011 by \

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Of course not. Let the scrubbing of history begin. I was never wrong because I control the record of what I said. How convenient. How completely consistent with the style of the global warming pushers.

This is like the deja vous with Gar-John all over again.

[^_^ 5,021]

This is like the deja vous with Gar-John all over again.

One person at a time, more and more people are catching on to the little game you people play. The jig is up. You're going to have make an honest living, or at least find another scam.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

One person at a time, more and more people are catching on to the little game you people play. The jig is up. You're going to have make an honest living, or at least find another scam.

Minnie nukewlar reactors and I'll call them the iNuke.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

One person at a time, more and more people are catching on to the little game you people play. The jig is up. You're going to have make an honest living, or at least find another scam.

How about another ice age?

[Gary and Alla 3,696]

This is good news. I am relieved to hear it is not so bad. Kind of like finding out you DON'T have cancer after all.