[ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

2010/3/3 Christopher Luebcke <cluebcke at yahoo.com>:
> Rafal,
> If you would like to argue that Bangledeshis are not at high risk if the sea
> level rises significantly, or that it is not the case that Arctic ice cover
> is drastically falling, do please be my guest.

### I note you didn't check the facts, as I suggested you should do.
Well, anyway: Bangladesh has not been losing land surface, in fact,
according to Dhaka-based Center for Environment and Geographic
Information Services (CEGIS), it has been gaining about 20 square
kilometers per year, despite continued rise in sea levels (which has
been going on since the last ice age but this is another story).
Obviously then, Bangladeshis are not at risk, despite statistically
significant rises in sea levels. World ice cover, including both the
Arctic and the Antarctic, is of course more relevant to global climate
than the Arctic alone, and it has remained essentially unchanged since
1995, as may be expected given the lack of statistically significant
global warming which was confirmed by e.g. Dr Phil Jones.

----------------------------
> The careful reader will in fact note that at no point, not once, during our
> lively exchange, have I staked a claim that any particular forecast for
> climate change is correct. I have stated only that I believe that
> significant climate change over the next several decades is likely.

### It's amazing how much you rely on innuendo. You mention millions
of Bangladeshi climate refugees storming our borders, you make claims
of precipitous ice loss, right before issuing sky-is-falling
predictions ("fairly serious climate disruptions"), then promptly deny
staking any claims on Bangladesh or ice cover. Yet, still you believe
in "significant climate change" that awaits us - but wait, where is
the basis for this prediction? If you don't stake a claim that any
particular forecast is correct, if you admit to ignorance of climate
science in general, how do you know anything about the future?

The simple fact is that nobody, even persons very well versed in
climate science (much more than I), can make any well-grounded,
specific, reliable predictions of climate. Nobody knows enough about
the literally hundreds of forcings that shape climate to peer into the
future - not even zettaflop computers could do it. Maybe in twenty or
thirty years there will be enough understanding of climate to allow
predictions but for now it is, as you might say, "productive", to
simply admit ignorance and limit predictions to the general statement
that historical conditions, both warmer and colder, will continue
reoccurring. In other words, business as usual.

Rafal