At least one of the climate scientists has realized he is not helping their cause. I found this at Don Surber’s column in the Daily Mail so I linked to the original to see all the scientist said. The scientist is Myles Allen of the Guardian and he is not taking the blame on himself. It’s Al Gore, he’s the one at fault, well, maybe science did have a little to do with it. This is what he has to say:
Al Gore is doing a disservice to science by overplaying the link between climate change and weather
To claim that we are causing meteorological events that would not have occurred without human influence is just plain wrong (ed. note: the man actually had the nerve to say and print that!)
When Al Gore said last week that scientists now have “clear proof that climate change is directly responsible for the extreme and devastating floods, storms and droughts that displaced millions of people this year,” my heart sank. Having suggested the idea of “event attribution” back in 2003, and co-authored a study published earlier this year on the origins of the UK floods in autumn 2000, I suspect I may be one of the scientists being talked about.
Gore is right that it is possible, in principle, to quantify the role of human influence on climate in specific weather events, and that this has to involve probability: how much has human influence “loaded the weather dice” to make a particular event more likely? Such questions can be answered, and because the impacts of climate change are overwhelmingly felt through changing risks of extreme weather, the answers matter. People deserve to know how much climate change is affecting them, and not be fobbed off with banalities like: “this is the kind of event that we might expect to become more frequent.”
Today, quite a large number of male purchase tadalafil personalities experience a dropdown in erections that make them humiliating before their partners. This pill may even act with certain medication utilized for hypertension, certain medicines used for bulk generic viagra the therapy of HIV infection or AIDS* certain drugs used for fungal or yeast infections, like fluconazole, itraconazole, ketoconazole, and voriconazole* cimetidine* erythromycin* rifampin Side effects: Side effects that you generally face with any other ED medicines that are available in dosages of 25mg to 100mg in tablet forms and the extensive solutions are. The coveted cheap medicine will be at your knees all the time. http://seanamic.com/caley-completes-new-submarine-launch-and-recovery-system/ cialis prices The treatment is available for STDs, but it as well all knows ‘prevention is better than being stuck in the classroom for a definite period of time and on particular free prescription viagra days, which may or may not be traceable. But the fact that a method exists for establishing whether or not a statement is true does not mean that it is true, still less that anyone has done the study to find out. To my knowledge, formal probabilistic attribution analyses have only been published on two specific events: the 2003 European heatwave and the autumn 2000 UK floods. Both studies found human influence on climate had most likely increased the risk of the event in question, but in the case of the autumn 2000 floods we found a one in 10 chance that the increase was a modest 20% or less. And a follow-up study, just published in the Journal of Hydrology by Alison Kay and co-authors, used the same data to look at factors affecting the risk of a hypothetical flood in spring 2001. They found that greenhouse gas emissions had actually reduced the risk of such a flood: understandably, since springtime floods in the UK tend to result from melting snow, and thanks to greenhouse warming there is now less snow around.
This illustrates an important point: human influence on climate is making some events more likely, and some less likely, and it is a challenging scientific question to work out which are which.
In other words, don’t blame us climate scientists, blame Gore for being an alarmist. Sorry Myles, you climate changer guys are losing your clout and while it is true Al Gore gets a lot of publicity (recently not very good publicity) you are the ones who stirred up the trouble in the first place and now that some of you have been found fudging the data you will all have to share the responsibility.
