Get Even More Visitors To Your Blog, Upgrade To A Business Listing >>

I'll take James Hansen over Michael Mann any time as 4C looms

And even more over Katharine Hayhoe.

The last person is not mentioned in a piece by Bob Henson, formerly of Weather Underground, now of Yale Climate Connections, over a battle between Hanson and Mann and others like Hayhoe who I have called "Climate change Obamiacs" in the past and whom, to Henson on Twitter, I called the similar "climate change neoliberals."

The issue, which Henson presents in New York Times style "he said, she said" journalism, is whether Hansen's right that we've permanently popped 1.5C on climate change already. Henson links to a longer piece at Inside Climate News where Hanson spells out his reasoning in detail, which in turn links to an academic study where he is a co-author.. He notes the decrease in aerosols pollution — think phasing out of coal for power plants and also cleaner emissions standards, especially here in the US, for diesel fuel — as a primary reason for his pessimism, and it makes sense.

It's not just the U.S. climate change Obamiacs who get blasted. It's also the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Anybody who knows anything knows that Hanson is right about this as well. The IPCC is deliberately conservative in its assessments as a form of kowtowing to its nation-state masters. It's also bureaucratic enough to be lumbering in gathering and analyzing data, with that kowtowing then getting baked in. And, operating on a four-year assessment cycle, whatever it spits out is behind the curve for that reason alone.

Henson (and his co-author and WU collaborator Jeff Masters) should know this; if not, they're part of the climate change Obamiacs problem.

Hansen was sounding the alarm before this co-authored research paper. Back in May, before the eye-popping summer of 2023, he already said we would hit 2C by 2050. He's right. That draft paper, a preview to the final joint study piece, notes that he had warned about the effect of the decline of sulfur-based aerosols back in 2021. He predicts a climb of 0.3C per decade. Do the math.

That's 4C by 2100. I think he's right.

And, no, Mann, he's NOT "hyperventilating."

“I’m frustrated by the hyperventilating going on over this. It’s frustrating that so many continue to miscommunicate about that and mislead the public as to where we are. The truth is bad enough.”

The truth is a lot worse than you and other climate change Obamiacs want to admit, for whatever reasons you don't want to admit it.

This is nothing new for Mann, who, as shown in 2020, simply doesn't want to accept studies that confront his Goldilocks idea that we have "some" climate change, too much for total comfort, but not enough for real alarm.

We may not need James Kunstler levels of alarm, but we need something halfway close to that level of radicalism.

Besides, even the IPCC which Hansen rightly challenges said last year that, barring strong action, we're facing at least 3C. Not quite Hansen's 4C, but yet.

Remember: The Paris Accords are toothless Jell-O, because Dear Leader Obama and Xi Jinping wanted it that way.

And, per WHY I said Hayhoe was wrong four years ago, as well as how? Mann, as well as her, need to read some David Hume.

Oh, and unless he's had some big new revelation, #BernAnon sheepdogger David Sirota is still a hypocrite on this.

This post first appeared on SocraticGadfly, please read the originial post: here

Share the post

I'll take James Hansen over Michael Mann any time as 4C looms


Subscribe to Socraticgadfly

Get updates delivered right to your inbox!

Thank you for your subscription