Global Warming Doomsday Fails To Arrive – New Deadline 2035
Climate alarmists claim in a newly published study that the world will reach a “point of no return” if there is no dramatic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. “We show that there are strict deadlines for taking climate action,” said Henk Dijkstra, a co-author of the study.
The news media is extensively reporting on the prediction, characterizing the study as ominous, yet the study serves as a refreshing reminder of how all previous predictions of climate deadlines and doomsdays failed to materialize.
In 1989 a United Nations senior environment official said entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth if global warming was not reversed before the year 2000.
In 2006 Al Gore wrote that “We have at most ten years—not ten years to decide upon action, but ten years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.”
Also in 2006, James Hansen said the world had just 10 years to take “serious action” about greenhouse gas emissions or we would cross of “tipping point” of climate danger.
In 2009, Hansen reduced the time he said we had to address global warming, writing: “Barack Obama has only four years to save the world” from global warming.
In 2007, the head of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that it would be “too late” to address global warming if action weren’t taken by 2012.
In 2009, Prince Charles said the world had just eight years left to end global warming or there would be “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.”
In 2012, the president of the United Nations Foundation said the Obama second term would be “the last window of opportunity” to emplace dramatic carbon dioxide restrictions necessary to keep future warming “anywhere approaching” a two-degree Celsius tipping point.
At least this time the alarmists are giving themselves a little more time before they have to embarrassingly reset the doomsday climate clock.
Read more at CFACT
Trackback from your site.
Dr Pete Sudbury
| #
I’m thinking this is yet another deliberate misunderstanding of warnings given by people who do understand what they are talking about, by people who don’t, or don’t want to.
When you have an oil tanker to turn around, the point at which it is too late to avoid danger by turning the tiller, throwing the engines into reverse, etc., is a long time before the point at which it hits the reef. Clearly, the whole earth has a huge inertia, and any change, once set in motion, continues for a long time; hence the talk of 1.5C change being “locked in” even though we’re nearer 1C at present.
It is quite possible that we have passed the point of no return, and most evidence suggests we must be close to it. …but as Neils Bohr (among others) remarked “prediction is really difficult, particularly if it is about the future”.
What is absolutely certain is that pretending nothing is wrong, whilst sneering at people who warn you of danger, until eventually you hit the reef, is dumb, negligent, arrogant, incompetent or a mixture of all of them. But it’s okay, people who behave like that always find a way to blame someone else, usually saying that the warnings weren’t clear enough. The warnings are very clear, and given by people (individually and collectively) with vastly more intelligence, knowledge and experience than any of us writing on this site.
For a (bit of, calm and not over-dramatic reality, try the, very recent, Royal Society joint statement: https://royalsociety.org/~/media/news/2018/commonwealth-academies-consensus-statement-on-climate-change-12-march-2018.pdf).
Have a great day!
Pete
Reply
Alan Thorpe
| #
The trouble is that although there is thermal inertia in the earth’s climate we do not have a control knob to do anything about it. This is because CO2 does not control temperature and the known physics is proof of this. In addition the basics of thermodynamics mean that temperatures will always be stable. Heat transfers from hot to cold and it is quite impossible for thermal inertia effect to produce runaway heating or cooling. The cycles of the past ice ages are further proof that we do not have conditions on earth that produce runaway effects. Fundamentally, only the sun can cause temperatures to increase or cool in the long term.
Stop your alarmist nonsense. We, the ignorant masses, have the ability for rational thought and it does not even need a great deal of physics to recognise the alarmism as the biggest scientific fraud ever imposed on us.
Reply
Lloyd Adams
| #
And the problem with people like you is that no matter how you predictions are delayed, not accurate, etc. you fall back on “you have to do something to turn the ship around!” As someone with boat experience, your allegory is false. If you try to do an emergency course change based on a mirage or small log, you can actually do great damage to the cargo and crew. By the way. wasn’t it Brit Scientists who tried to delete E-mails that may now agree with their pontificates? Also, you computer is based on petroleum products. Better finds another way to communicate!
Reply
Paquin
| #
Hello Mr.Pete.
Just for my governe, what of Dr. are You?
Merci. René.
Reply
Tom Martin
| #
//What is absolutely certain is that pretending nothing is wrong//
really – Wasn’t it Hanson who said the west side highway in New York City would be under water (10ft) in 20 – 40 years…Well the sea apparently did not get the notice.
11 inches per century seems to the the rate .. kinda natural boring and not scary at all.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/22/a-little-known-but-failed-20-year-old-climate-change-prediction-by-dr-james-hansen/
Reply
James G Kennedy Jr
| #
It is noteworthy that the comment by Pete Sudbury represents the Lleftist/Liberal doom and gloom sky is falling clucking, while utterly lacking to provide anything empirical that supports his chicken little nonsense.
Reply
Julian Fell
| #
Folks still dont get it. It is the oceans that set the climate. The balance between energy in and energy out. If there were no oceans, the planet would be 30 degrees colder and have a climate like Mars. It is variations in the amount of heat going in to the ocean that sets the ocean surface temperature. Cloud cover is the regulator and sunspots control the cloud cover. CO2 has nothing to do with the heat gains and losses of the massive ocean heat storage battery. The atmosphere has minimal heat storage capacity, losing globally the same amount of heat as it gains every 24 hours. The atmosphere determines the weather. CO2 warms by day and then equally cools by night.. net effect zero, and only in areas of low humidity. Otherwise CO2 is irrelevant to climate and weather. Still the obsession with CO2 hangs on fueling wishful thinking and an army of climate officials.
Reply