Quote:

CLIMATE Commissioner Tim Flannery's work has been labelled "alarmist" by a world renowned climate scientist who says his own dire predictions were "wrong".    Just six years after predicting climate change would kill billions by the end of this century, British scientist James Lovelock said warming was not happening at forecast rates. "There's nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now," Mr Lovelock, who still believes in climate change, told MSNBC. "The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time ... it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising - carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that." In the interview from his home in Britain, the 92-year-old said Professor Flannery's book The Weather Makers and Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth were "alarmist". Professor Flannery has praised Mr Lovelock in the past, particularly his Gaia theory that the earth is a single and self regulating organism. Has Tim Flannery been discredited with all the wet weather lately? Do you still believe in man-made climate change, or is it just like Y2K for the new millennium? Tell us below "Within this century the concept of a strong Gaia will actually become physically manifest," he told the ABC last year. In a review in The Monthly of Mr Lovelock's last book The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning, Professor Flannery said his scientific credentials were "impeccable". The book, Professor Flannery said, had an "important message" that "in a few years, or a few decades at most, abrupt changes in Earth's climate will begin, which will end up killing almost all of us". A Climate Commission spokeswoman defended Professor Flannery's work. "The Weather Makers is an accurate and balanced work. It's a critically acclaimed piece of work that inspires motivation to act, not fear," she said. "The most important message is that hope is not lost, we can still act to avoid the worst impacts of climate change." Greens Leader Christine Milne said the climate was still warming. "Every single year from 2001 on has been one of the 13 hottest years on record and the clear scientific evidence is that it is human activities driving temperatures ever higher ... we can't get complacent about what needs to be done," she said http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/climate-change-alarmist-warnings-all-hot-air-says-british-scientist-james-lovelock/story-e6freuzi-1226337509756

As we have seen it was never really about climate anyway, even no global warming is not enough to convince the faithful that the planet is not warming  ;D

If it's reported in more credible media, I might give it more attention. I hope Lovelock's right. Probability says otherwise.

Ajax has bundied on again. Hey Ajax. How many sites you been to this morning posting that same garbage.  Whats your post rate up to now days??? 

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Nov 4^th, 2013 at 9:38am:

Ajax has bundied on again. Hey Ajax. How many sites you been to this morning posting that same garbage.  Whats your post rate up to now days???

ONe can only hope he is getting paid the very best boring ass crack for his troubles  :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 4^th, 2013 at 9:58am:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Nov 4th, 2013 at 9:38am: Ajax has bundied on again. Hey Ajax. How many sites you been to this morning posting that same garbage.  Whats your post rate up to now days???  ONe can only hope he is getting paid the very best boring ass crack for his troubles  :D

My two favourite TROLLS Spartacus and deathridesahorse.

Full of insults and ad homs......????

Don't know how you have lasted this long on a forum.

TROLLS

You know you are doing well ajax when all you have is troll troll troll from this board of religous nutters.

You bring it, they spit on it. Good work. Real science isnt for this board.

Ajax slaughtered in public by a primate with ordinary typing skills

says a lot doesn't it ladies and gentlemen

http://mentalskillness.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/monkey_computer.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 5^th, 2013 at 6:50pm:

Ajax slaughtered in public by a primate with ordinary typing skills says a lot doesn't ladies and gentlemen

Says a lot about your average global warming groupie and not much else  ;D

Innocent bystander wrote on Nov 5^th, 2013 at 6:54pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 5th, 2013 at 6:50pm: Ajax slaughtered in public by a primate with ordinary typing skills says a lot doesn't ladies and gentlemen Says a lot about your average global warming groupie and not much else  ;D

HOW DARE YOU RESPOND TO ONE OF MY POSTS WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN PERMISSION YOU SMELLY DE-EVOLVING SLAB OF DECAYING CARCASS SLIME STENCH

---

There would seem to be large division in the church of climate change.
The soothsayers are squabbling amongst themselves.
Fancy labelling a fellow soothsayer "alarmist".
This is what happens when a soothsayers predictions are false, they fall upon each other like jackals looking to place blame where it belongs.

You can smell bullsh1t when they bring up that Y2K was a hoax.

I can assure everyone, without the work done in the late 90's to fix software, a lot of major systems would have started behaving erratically post 2000. And as anyone who has worked in finance will tell you, errors quickly propagate around the very tightly coulped industry, making it very very hard to unwind.

Only recently, I saw a case of residual Y2K when 2013 rolled in. Someone had coded a routine that assumed any 2 digit date >= 13 was a 20th century date (ie 1913).   Luckily it was caught early, but still involved a significant outage until fixed.


Back to climate change, I saw an article about John Howard saying that he rejected all climate science based on his "instinct".   
The mind boggles.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Nov 6^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

You can smell bullsh1t when they bring up that Y2K was a hoax. I can assure everyone, without the work done in the late 90's to fix software, a lot of major systems would have started behaving erratically post 2000. And as anyone who has worked in finance will tell you, errors quickly propagate around the very tightly coulped industry, making it very very hard to unwind. Only recently, I saw a case of residual Y2K when 2013 rolled in. Someone had coded a routine that assumed any 2 digit date >= 13 was a 20th century date (ie 1913).   Luckily it was caught early, but still involved a significant outage until fixed. Back to climate change, I saw an article about John Howard saying that he rejected all climate science based on his "instinct".    The mind boggles.

I  don't think that article said he rejected all  science but he does do the mealy mouthed thing for shizzle!

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Nov 6^th, 2013 at 7:16am:

There would seem to be large division ...

It's only the Daily Telegraph. Nothing of any significance.

It would be interesting to see what James Lovelock actually said. The Daily Mirror has a knack of misquoting people.

Even at 92, he's too sharp to have said that there has been no warming since 98. I remember that he specifically talked about increasing ocean heat uptake on one of his recent interviews.

Remember that the Daily Mirror brought to you the famous headline "IPCC admits it was wrong" when they did nothing of the sort.  I think the Mirror is the original source of this paid editorial.

muso wrote on Nov 6^th, 2013 at 9:26pm:

It would be interesting to see what James Lovelock actually said. The Daily Mirror has a knack of misquoting people. Even at 92, he's too sharp to have said that there has been no warming since 98. I remember that he specifically talked about increasing ocean heat uptake on one of his recent interviews. Remember that the Daily Mirror brought to you the famous headline "IPCC admits it was wrong" when they did nothing of the sort.  I think the Mirror is the original source of this paid editorial.

In economics the indicators sometimes simply aren't sensitive to the problem. I thought lovelock was saying the rate of expected change simply wasn't there in certain indicators... raising questions of course but what questions does he feel need answering first i would like to know!

I've read through Lovelock's home page. I think most of it was related to his book "The Revenge of Gaia" in which he said:


Quote:

...billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable” by the end of the 21st century.

Nobody else, and certainly not the IPCC would endorse such a prediction. So in that respect, he was going overboard.

The only problem is that the denialist bloggers have decided that he's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. He has said himself that he's not a climate science denier. He's just correcting some of his wilder claims.

Personally I think that the world would act on climate change before it got to that stage. They are already acting on it.  The US for example, has reduced carbon emissions to pre 1990 levels. China has enough renewable energy to power the whole of Australia twice over.   

muso wrote on Nov 6^th, 2013 at 9:26pm:

It would be interesting to see what James Lovelock actually said. ...

As far as I can tell this is the source. It's from an April 2012 telephone interview Lovelock gave to MSNBC, promoting his next book.

# wrote on Nov 7^th, 2013 at 10:08am:

muso wrote on Nov 6th, 2013 at 9:26pm: It would be interesting to see what James Lovelock actually said. ... As far as I can tell this is the source. It's from an April 2012 telephone interview Lovelock gave to MSNBC, promoting his next book.

Lovelock has a strong faith in his Gaia mechanism, a mechanism which will respond to anything humans can throw at it - after all humans are intrinsically part of the Gaia reality (in Lovelock's eyes).

What is often NOT quoted by Lovelock is his view that should humanity introduce perturbations and contaminations which are extreme and severe to the Gaia response mechanism, then humanity itself can be cleansed from the surface of this planet quite easily.

Lovelock's Gaia reality does not need humanity!