The UK Met Office has released a new report, detailing the reasons that scientists believe we are now seeing an acceleration in global temperature rise. (see my post below)
Met Office Chief Scientist Dame Julia Slingo interviewed here by the BBC’s John Humphrys, long known as a bit of a crank on climate matters.
Slingo calmly brushes his incredulity aside, to explain what those paying attention already know – the Globe is warm, and getting warmer, fast.
Below, my video from 2013 included NASA’s Josh Willis, and James Hansen, explaining why any idea of a “Pause” in temperature rise is illusory.
I’ll also include this BBC interview from 2013, where the BBC interviewer, again, had to be corrected by NASA Chief Atmospheric Scientist James Hansen, on the assumption of a bogus “pause”.
The BBC have run out of original thought. They just follow the superficial coverage of the right-wing media.
This is a problem with scientists discussing the issue to the public. I’ll go back to my “regression of the mean” by deliberately picking a decade led by an el nino event where there was an extreme result. The following years (due to a variety of factors) will show a regression line that appears to be flat. This argument would have been understood far better by the audience as a “law of averages” argument, that points fingers at the deniers, and avoids getting into a host of complicated details.
Ultimately, CO2 determines that warming will take place. Hansen said so. He could have started there and avoided the crap about predicting the weather.
Poorly framed and antagonist questions questions from a man who is intelligent and should know better. Humphrys should be put in a black chair (Mastermind) and quizzed on Climate Change. If he gets a low score he should be sent to Earth Science school for dummies and then re-quizzed and re-quizzed until he provides evidence of understanding.
I am not impressed at all I felt like reaching out and shaking sense into him if only by putting a pile of books in front of him and telling hism to, ‘go read and learn’.
I know Humphrys has done rather better in the past, I still have a copy of his: The Great Food Gamble which I read yonks ago. He can do the investigation of a subject intelligently, maybe he should stay away from the dinner party sets of Lawson etc. for they will bring him down to their level.
I thought his questions were perfectly framed. For their intent.
Sorry for typos, gout is a pain, and no it is not from drinking port, or much other alcohol for that matter.
I think she should have taken his disingenuous questions and shoved them up his ass. Exactly what predictions were not met? What scientists ever predicted such a thing?
Maybe Slingo would benefit by taking a course such as this: UQx DENIAL101x 0.1.1.1 Introduction to Denial.
I may be wandering off topic here, but the UK cuts in renewable subsidies are starting to produce some worrying effects. Sources within the UK renewables industry are threatening to “shut up shop” as a result, potentially undoing much good work here in the UK.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13718884.Subsidies_axe___threaten_future_of_renewable_energy_firms_/?ref=rss
So this climate denial is not to be ignored, as it is in part driving the ideology behind recent UK government policy decisions.