[LINK] Weekend Magazine - Remote Siberian Lake Holds Clues to Arctic--and Antarctic--Climate Change

[TKoltai]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au 
> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Jim Birch
> Sent: Monday, 25 June 2012 4:36 PM
> Cc: link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Weekend Magazine - Remote Siberian Lake 
> Holds Clues to Arctic--and Antarctic--Climate Change
> 
> 
> I once got a conspiracy of two going for a while.  We fooled 
> a few of the other school kids for a couple of days IIRC.
> 
> Achieving the same kind of thing with with tens of thousands 
> of scientists would be a lot harder.
> 
> Do you know any scientists?  Do you think you could have got 
> them to lie in scientific publications for small amounts of 
> money?  It wouldn't be easy. How much time, money and 
> organisational skill do you think you would need to get a 
> watertight conspiracy of ten thousand scientists in place? 
> The global climate conspiracy is a truly amazing piece of work.
> 

Actually Jim,

The global climate change "conspiracy" as you call it consists of only
79 publicly pro GW scientists.
The "anti" lobby consists of a considerably smaller number (prepared to
be public - with most public "anti GW" scientists choosing to live
outside the USA - including the former GISS NASA scientists).

But let us ignore the concept of conspiracy, let us trade real numbers
instead of name calling and snide insinuations... 

I'll advance a GW scenario and its results below. 
As one of the only persons in Link that I believe is qualified to
comment on these matters, I would be appreciative if you could confirm
or refute the GW scenario outlined:

Quote/
One of the most important papers in the history of the climate alarm is
published by J. Hansen and collaborators in Journal of Geophysical
Research (1988). The title is "Global Climate Changes as Forecast by
Goddard Institute for Space Studies".

In this paper they present the GISS model II to simulate the global
climate effects of time-dependent  variations of atmospheric trace gases
and aerosols.  They demonstrate the effect of 3 scenarios:

-          A : Increase of 1.5% CO2 emissions per year

-          B: Approximate constant increase of CO2 emissions after 2000

-          C: No increase in CO2 emissions after the year 2000 

http://kaltesonne.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/hansen.gif

The CO2 emissions have since 2000 increased with 2.5%, which means that
we should expect a more drastic temperature increase than in model A.
In the figure three scenarios are shown together with the observed
global temperature curve - all shown as 5 year running mean.  

The arrow above scenario A is what they may have predicted with a 2.5 %
CO2 increase which is observed, instead of the 1.5% in scenario A.
However, the observed temperature increase is about 0.6C, while the
predicted increase is about 1.5C. /Quote

Continues: ... http://www.kaltesonne.de/?p=4006

TomK