The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.

Tuesday, September 19, 2017

Adjusting the Settled Science

TRIGGER WARNINGS:  Our understanding of science evolves, as we learn more.  The other option is to become more ignorant as Normals become smarter.

For John, BLUFSo, 1.5 C (As in Communist) is like 2.7 Fahrenheit.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



From Ms Natalie Solent, of Essex, at Samizdata, 18 September 2017.  She describes herself thusly—"I remain more of a believer in anthropogenic climate change than many here, but after three or four cycles of this, cynicism does creep in."

Here is how the Blog Post starts:

As ever, Paris was the place to see really hot models, but you have missed your chance.  A couple of years ago they were basking in the admiration of the world. Now, they are looking a little old.  However you can still read about them in today’s Times:
We were wrong — worst effects of climate change can be avoided, say scientists

Catastrophic impacts of climate change can still be avoided, according to scientists who have admitted they were too pessimistic about the chances of limiting global warming.

The world has warmed more slowly than had been predicted by computer models, which were “on the hot side” and overstated the impact of emissions on average temperature, research has found.

New forecasts suggest that the world has a better chance than claimed of meeting the goal set by the Paris Agreement on climate change of limiting warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

The study, published in the prestigious journal Nature Geoscience, makes clear that rapid reductions in emissions will still be required but suggests that the world has more time to make the necessary changes.

Michael Grubb, professor of international energy and climate change at University College London and one of the study’s authors, admitted that his previous prediction had been wrong.

Here is how it ends, with a bit of snark:
He [Professor Grubb] said that too many of the models used “were on the hot side”, meaning they forecast too much warming.

See, I promised you hot models and here are so many hot models, you may even get tired of hot models.

Another approach may be that this is mainly an engineering problem, in which the engineering has to stay ahead of the climate changes.

Regards  —  Cliff

No comments: