Not exact matches
Extraordinarily, Jordan also recalled long
meetings about the BBC's coverage of
climate change with politicians Peter Lilley and Nigel Lawson, both
known for their scepticism.
7:22 p.m. Updates below Quite a few professional
climate skeptics have been crowing in the last few days
about a 20 - percent downward shift in the short - term forecast for global temperature (through 2017) from Britain's weather and
climate agency, best
know as the
Met Office.
A small upturn, or even one year of warming, is enough to start the now well
known clamoring
about the disastrous impacts of
climate change, yet any movement in a downward direction is always
met with cries of derision, or claims that even that is really due to
climate change.
Larry organized the
meeting around all of us getting to
know each other and our concerns
about climate change.
ATMOSPHERIC and other
climate - change scientists need to
meet regularly to discuss and debate what is
known and what remains to be discovered
about climate change.
And while the general principles of CO2 fertilisation are
known, there is still much to learn
about how these processes will act in future as the world continues to warm, said Prof Richard Betts, head of
climate impacts research at the
Met Office Hadley Centre, in a guest post for Carbon Brief.
In fact, the need for the
meeting and the programme indicates how little they
know about weather and
climate.
The statement
about most expert
climate scientists is unproblematic and true, as just
about anyone who reads the literature or goes to the
meetings should
know — even if they are unaware of the convergent findings from research measuring the degree of agreement through widely different methods by Cook, Anderegg, Doran, Oreskes and others; or of the statements by every major organization of scientists.
«I
know at Durban [a previous negotiations
meeting], Canada spoke very strongly
about the importance of
climate change and thereafter refused to endorse the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
If I attempt to put myself in the position of a robot from Mars who doesn't
know anything
about the
climate change debate except that it seems important to humans, I don't believe I could conclude that anyone was «taken to the cleaners» in this exchange (assuming a robot from Mars
knows what that expression means:) I think I'd have to conclude that both participants were framing the issue in different ways and so there wasn't a
meeting of minds, nor any change of the needle by either one on the attitudes of the other, nor likely much to help inform locals who were just as mystified by the debate as I was.
Anyone who
knows this could have made the same «prediction», and it says absolutely nothing
about the
Met Office's ability to make statements
about climate change which are consistent with reality.