So how accurate are those global warming predictions?

Evidently most are not very accurate at all. From Fox you can read about “8 Botched Environmental Forecasts.” There’s more, like the MET Office in Britain predicting a mild winter in 2010-2011, not to mention other warmists faux pas.

Below is one to whet your appetite. Considering all the Snowmageddons we’re having it seems very appropriate. Britain is even set to possibly have the coldest winter in 1,000 years. Yes 1,000, not 100 not 10.

1. Within a few years “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” Snowfall will be “a very rare and exciting event.” Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, interviewed by the UK Independent, March 20, 2000.

Well, I”d suggest Dr. Viner go ask someone in the UK or NYC about this “rare” snowfall. He could also ask anyone in much of Europe. Germany got snow bombed and Paris basically shut down, including the airport. Snow was even reported in Rome and the Island of Capri. Even Miami is having the coldest December on record.

Here’s another prediction that’s gone down the toilet. It seems that all those predictions of massive sea-level rise are so much BS, too. From I Hate the Media we get this one “About those global sea level predictions: Never mind

You can read the whole thing here, but you can see from the chart below that those predictions that have idiots proclaiming that New York City will soon look like Atlantis are a joke.

Based on this I can't fathom why anyone believes in Anthropogenic Global Warming

The warmer predictions and the above chart ARE proof that P.T. Barnum (or whomever said it) was correct when he said “There’s a sucker born every minute.” It seems to me that big Al and the AGW crowd have found most of the suckers on the planet who continue to believe in global warming when it’s blatantly obvious it’s a total crock of BS.

So, next time you hear some BS prediction that we’re all going to die from global warming I’d suggest you do some nosing around before you put that $20 into the Church of Global Warming’s donation basket.

If you’re going to believe forecasts I’d suggest you check out Piers Corbyn or Joe Bastardi, who seem to have a much better record than the warmers who seem to base their predictions upon what they wish would happen instead of reality.

More CO2 Insanity.

Source: Fox News

Source: I Hate the Media

Source: The Telegraph

H/T: Watts Up With That?

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, NOAA, Piers Corbyn, Science, Sea-Level, The Met Office, Weather

3 responses to “So how accurate are those global warming predictions?

  1. rogerthesurf

    I agree that we are in the grip of the biggest and most insane hoax in history, and unless the public get wise to it soon, we will all be parted from what wealth we have.

    Lets take a simple economic view of what is likely to happen.

    In the absence of sufficient alternative solutions/technologies, the only way western countries can ever attain the IPCC demands of CO2 emissions reduced to 40% below 1990 levels, (thats about 60% below todays) is to machine restrictions on the use of fossil fuels. Emission Trading schemes are an example.

    As the use of fossil fuels is roughly linear with anthropogenic CO2 emissions, to attain a 60% reduction of emissions , means about the same proportion of reduction of fossil fuel usage, including petrol, diesel, heating oil, not to mention coal and other types including propane etc.

    No matter how a restriction on the use of these is implemented even a 10% decrease will make the price of petrol go sky high. In otherwords, (and petrol is just one example) we can expect, if the IPCC has its way, a price rise on petrol of greater than 500%.
    First of all, for all normal people, this will make the family car impossible to use. Worse than that though, the transport industry will also have to deal with this as well and they will need to pass the cost on to the consumer. Simple things like food will get prohibitively expensive. Manufacturers who need fossil energy to produce will either pass the cost on to the consumer or go out of business. If you live further than walking distance from work, you will be in trouble.
    All this leads to an economic crash of terrible proportions as unemployment rises and poverty spreads.
    I believe that this will be the effect of bowing to the IPCC and the AGW lobby. AND as AGW is a hoax it will be all in vain. The world will continue to do what it has always done while normal people starve and others at the top (including energy/oil companies and emission traders) will enjoy the high prices.

    Neither this scenario nor any analysis of the cost of CO2 emission reductions is included in IPCC literature, and the Stern report which claims economic expansion is simply not obeying economic logic as it is known in todays academic world.

    The fact that the emission reduction cost issue is not discussed, leads me to believe that there is a deliberate cover up of this issue. Fairly obviously the possibility of starvation will hardly appear to the masses.

    AGW is baloney anyway!

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

  2. smart guy

    You are dumb. Technically it’s not called global warming, it’s called global climate CHANGE, implying that there will be extremes in both directions. Educate yo self.

  3. I assume “smart guy” in your case is an oxymoron?