"Without a Paris agreement, global warming is set to reach as much as 5C (41F) above pre-industrial levels. Scientists estimate that warming above 2C (35.6F) will result in catastrophic and irreversible changes to the weather, including droughts, floods, heatwaves, fiercer storms and sea level rises."
Bill
Do you expect a journo to understand the difference between absolute temperatures and relative ones, or to just plug "5 C in F" into google and paste it into their article?
The online version has an addendum admitting:- This article was amended on 23 November 2015 to correct the conversion of temperature changes from celsius to fahrenheit
If the journalist can't understand that, it's difficult to see how to trust the subsequent claim that the sky is falling.
I do when the journo is an award winning science journo, yes.
Bill
Just need an addendum to admit that all their thinking needs revision. They thrive on the same alarmist principles other publications get slated for.
Yes thick journalists. But it's apparent you don't know what "absolute temperature" is either. So hardly in a position to criticise.
Yep. They stand there, and they say that, knowing its utter total bollocks.
In the same way Obama is an award winning politician?
And Jimmy Saville got an OBE for his work with Children?
absolute
Wining awards for what, journalism or science? Awarded by whom, other journalists or scientists?
TBH I didn't spot the temperature error until the second reading. The cynic in me was too busy wondering how some agreement between nations is going to affect the climate. Agreements are one thing, actually
*doing* things is another.
The mistake wouldn't be down to the journalist who wrote the story, he would have expressed it in degC only. It would have been the sub-editor that tried to convert it into deg F, so that us poor old folks who still think in old money could follow it.
Greenland was so called because at the time it was discovered it was green. It was only after it was colonised that it mostly turned to ice.
Having Greenland green didn't bring catastrophic and irreversible changes to the weather.
The current exaggeration is a scam to raise taxes without too much of a public backlash.
Jim
On this morning's R4 Today programme, someone (who seemed to know what he was talking about) said that the predicted rise was (I think) between
1 and 4.5 degrees - and that in the last 20 years, the temperature rise had been half of what had been predicted. The conclusion was that nobody really knew for sure. >
That's not true.
Therefore that's a straw man.
That's an opinion, but so far not based on much.
You are being paid by the climate change lobby to make their opponents look silly AICMFP.
Cheers
The Greenland ice sheet is at least 400000 years old.
I expect that it was a "helpful" sub-editor who inserted the Fahrenheit values. The Telegraph had a habit of doing that to Philip Eden's articles, but to make matters worse they would give the Fahrenheit value first with the Celsius one in brackets. Annoying even when they got the Fahrenheit value correct but infuriating when they made the same mistake as the one above.
Mind you, one can't deny that a temperature increase of more than 35.6F WOULD result in a catastrophic change to the weather. :)
En el artículo , Bill Wright escribió:
They're all journos. Sub-editors who used to do fact checking and proof reading, no longer exist, or are unpaid interns on "work experience".
Ian Jackson scribbled
Bill Wright and TNP are world authorities on global warming. They've written papers on it. They both lead teams of scientists who have travelled the world accumilating data to back up their theories. Their number crunching computers are churing away, 24/7 producing all the information that the world's governments should be using to make their decisions on the subject.
They are both Kippers.
One of the above statements is true.
Hmm, The Natural Kipper ...has a certain ring to it.
And I got O Level Maths. A real travesty that was. Showed the system for what it was.
Bill
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.