The Exclusion Of Climate Science From COP meetings
Arctic News has weighed in (again) on the COP26 meetings, this time to point out that real climate science, and climate scientist were excluded from COP 26 meetings.
Frankly, this should have you quivering in your boots because it reveals just how terribly out of touch world leaders are – or just how terribly deceptive world leaders have become.
Let’s face it – this can’t be an “accident”. That defies all probability. It’s now painfully clear that COP26 and all the hoopla, hand wringing, back slapping and lies they’re going to try to force-feed upon the world of their “success” and “pledges” is a complete and total sham.
I knew that – just wanted my readers to know that too.
Meanwhile, the actual amount of warming, i.e., the “target” of 1.5C claimed by these uninformed idiots is already in the rear window!
Recall that the world has been holding these “climate meetings” going back to 1992? Well, here’s your PROOF that they are not doing anywhere near enough in the graph below:
Hellish temperatures are definitely in your future. Don’t fall for the lies, promises, pledges and commitments – believe the reality instead.
The exclusion of climate science from COP meetings
The lessons from climate science indicate:
- While politicians talk about a 1.5°C target, the mean global temperature has already exceeded this level and likely approaches 2°C when the transient short-term masking effects of aerosols are accounted for. Thus Hansen and Sato (2012) estimate aerosol to lower global temperatures by between -1.0°C and -1.2°C, which implies the real mean global temperatures are close to +2°C above pre-industrial level. By contrast, references to the NASA’s ~1.02°C warming can be compared to a measurement of a patient’s body temperature only after they take a dose of aspirin. Furthermore, this NASA anomaly is measured from 1951-1980, whereas the Paris Agreement calls for a pre-industrial base.
- Whereas the critical need for emissions reduction is central to climate negotiations, the effects of cumulative concentration of GHG in the atmosphere (CO₂ + equivalent CH₄, N₂O, etc), which trigger amplifying feedbacks from land and ocean, remains hardly tackled. The current CO₂-equivalent level of >500 ppm (Figure 2), which is near X1.8 times the pre-industrial level of ~280 ppm CO₂, is generating amplifying feedbacks. According to a climate sensitivity estimate of 3 ± 1.5°C per doubling of CO₂ the equilibrium rise in temperature could be approaching +3°C.
- The role of amplifying GHG feedbacks from land and oceans, leading to enhanced heating, appears to be neglected in climate talks, including:
– A decline in the polar albedo (reflection) due to large-scale lateral and vertical melting of ice;
– Reduced CO₂ intake by warming oceans. Currently the oceans absorb between 35-42% of all CO₂ and around 90% of the excess heat;
– Warming, desiccation, deforestation and fires over land areas;
– Release of methane from melting permafrost and from polar sediments;
– An increase in evaporation, particularly in arid zones, raising atmospheric vapor levels, which enhances the greenhouse gas effect.
- IPCC-based climate trends are mostly linear, yielding an impression that overshooting of the warming trend is capable of being reversed within acceptable time scales, projections which neglect the likelihood of tipping points of no return. The time scales for attempts to cool the atmosphere may exceed the longevity of civilization. The weakening of the Arctic jet stream, allowing air and water masses of contrasted temperatures to cross the Arctic boundary, leads to disruptions such as the freezing “beast from the east” fronts that hit North America and Europe and Arctic wildfires. The flow of ice melt water from Greenland and Antarctica into the oceans may result in marked transient temperature reversals in the oceans, extending onto land.
2 thoughts on “The Exclusion Of Climate Science From COP meetings”
Meanwhile, in the real world climate-related disasters mount by the day.
Last year was the most expensive ever in NZ. $248 million for little NZ, with is tiny population of 5 million.
‘Extremely hazardous’: Green clouds ominous sign for Kiwis amid severe thunderstorm warnings over central North Island (msn.com)
(I hope the video accompanying this report doesn’t suddenly disappear.)
Presumably next year will be worse. Maybe a lot worse.
That’s what deeply concerns me. Already the changes to the climate are very uncomfortable and expensive. Last summer’s “heat domes” were truly unbelievable. It was like sitting under a hot blowtorch, you could tell something was VERY different and abnormal. I had never experienced anything like this in my entire life.
It’s been a wet fall, but still no snow, not even a hint. This area is projected to be “wetter, warmer” under most climate models.