roger harrabin ?@RHarrabin
@CFigueres @BarryGardiner Kyoto Protocol sent to terminal ward at #cop18. Long live SonofKyoto…. http://tmi.me/C7Ny3
Richard Black is gone, long live Roger Harrabin…..
Harrabin does a wash up report on Doha with a decidedly pro-AGW stance….even claiming Hurrican Sandy was a result of AGW. Rather than a balanced report of the politics and science he just lists as many scaremongering items as he can whilst assuring us that everyone believes in AGW and that decisive action must be taken to save the world…and especially the poor nations of the world……..and remember children….fossil fuels can’t be burnt without wrecking the world!
Harrabin’s notes: Kyoto rumbles on
Since the protocol was constructed 15 years ago, greenhouse gases have risen relentlessly. [But not temperatures Roger eh? Forget to mention that?]
Authorities warn that on current trends the Earth is, at best estimate, likely to exceed the 2C temperature rise agreed as a limit by all governments.
Some think the climate will heat by as much as 6C…….scientists warn….there is no credible scenario for adapting to temperatures at the upper limit.
Already, with a global temperature rise of 0.8C, even the US faces challenges. President Obama has asked for $60bn in the aftermath of “Superstorm” Sandy and New York may need to sacrifice Brooklyn to save Manhattan if a hurricane strikes again….Imagine how Niger will cope. Or Bangladesh, where the delta cannot be protected by sea walls without unimaginable expense. Or Nauru in the South Pacific.
The Doha conference did take a step towards acknowledging that rich nations may have an obligation to compensate poor nations which suffer irreparable damage from climatic change.
But all the nations in Doha agree that cuts need to be deeper and faster, preferably carried out by someone else. They don’t doubt the mainstream science on climate change.
By December 2015 all the world’s nations are due to have agreed a comprehensive deal to co-operate on an equal footing to tackle climate change…….The world’s nations will have to be ranked on a sliding scale with the richest polluters expected to cut most and contribute most cash towards helping the poor get clean energy and adapt to climate change. In future they may also be expected to compensate people if their land goes under the waves.
….the overall pace of change is totally inadequate…..Some blame politicians but they underestimate the scale of this political task. In the UK the Chancellor has already secured a review of climate laws because they impose short-term costs on people already struggling to pay energy bills. And the big incumbent fossil fuel firms insist that they are allowed to extract all their reserves even though the International Energy Agency warns that the fuels can’t be burned without wrecking the planet.
So who is winning the climate battle?
Little wonder that some people are gambling that the Earth proves more resilient to CO2 than the vast majority of scientists believe.
Well, as I;ve said before – all the carbon in fossil fuels was originally carbon dioxide in the air before being fixed by plants. (Not to mention the CO2 now trapped in CaCO3 (chalk, limestone, marble) that was originally in the air)
It didn’t destroy the planet then, re-releasing it won’t destroy the planet now.
Ask any AGW proponent about this – but don’t hold your breath waiting for a refutation.
Palm trees in antarctica
I’m coming to the conclusion that Harrabin’s cover as a propagandist is now so blown that he is almost an asset to the sane.
It’s impossible to listen to his biased hyperbole without laughing. And anyone who has even basic curiosity about the subject soon unearths his distortions.
The harm he is doing his cause and, inter alia, the BBC means it’s probably better if we campaign for him to keep his job.
For Hurricane experts like Chris Landsea, its quite bizarre. The AGW hypothesis says that there will be less Hurricanes because of the reduction in the differentiation of temperature between the surface and six miles up. This did not and is not happening, but it is true that there are less Hurricanes, but this is because of a reduction in the differentiation in temperature between the Arctic and the Tropics. But for some reason, Harrabin wants us to believe the scientists think Hurricanes are getting worse and are man made. This reflects the same strange battle between the Hurricane expert Chris Landsea and the IPCC.
Qatar was built without a sea level rise in mind
Did they use Al Gore’s architects?
You will also notice that Harrabin always inserts the word dangerous each time he mentioned climate change. Why is this? He mentioned it in Doha and again yesterday with his biased fracking story.
If AGW climate change is really taken place, is it actually dangerous?
Does anybody still remember all the same panicmongers insisting that there would be increasingly larger, year on year El Nino effects which aould cause world wide devastation with certain areas suffering permanent, devastating draughts whilst others would suffer from permanent downpours and be constantly flooded? What happened to all those dire warnings of doom?
The tune remains boringly the same, all that happens is that the words are constantly changed to make use of the latest perfectly normal weather incident as a warning of a carefully created, computer modelled, but never quite arriving, nightmare scenario to enable the Warmists to keep frightening the children into obedience.