David Viner : “There are no brakes you can apply,”

“When you start messing around with these natural systems, you can end up in situations where it’s unstoppable. There are no brakes you can apply,” said David Viner, a senior scientist at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

“This is a big deal because you can’t put the permafrost back once it’s gone. The causal effect is human activity and it will ramp up temperatures even more than our emissions are doing.”

In its last major report in 2001, the intergovernmental panel on climate change predicted a rise in global temperatures of 1.4C-5.8C between 1990 and 2100, but the estimate only takes account of global warming driven by known greenhouse gas emissions.

“These positive feedbacks with landmasses weren’t known about then. They had no idea how much they would add to global warming,” said Dr Viner.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to David Viner : “There are no brakes you can apply,”

  1. PearlandAggie says:

    There are no brakes you can apply

    Sounds eerily reminiscent of federal spending, no????

  2. you can’t put the permafrost back once it’s gone

    because it existed before the beginning of time. It didn’t just “come about” through some flimsy set of excuses like “nature”; permafrost is magical and eternal, unless hu-mans and their tiny foreheads interfere by driving their pathetic land-mobiles around.

    • Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

      Interesting comment by Viner!
      Where “Permafrost” is now was biologically active land for most of the history of the globe. Horror of horrors they are finding trees that once grew where “Permafrost” is now! His “Permafrost” is in all probability less than a thousand years old.
      I know some defender of the faith will tell me I am wrong and the “Permafrost” has been dated to 5,000 years ago! 😉

      • mkelly says:

        How dare you forget to mention all the mammoths and tusks found deep in the permafrost. That is an afront to all pacyderm loving peoples. 😉

  3. Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

    There are “Brakes” that can be applied that can stop this situation in a heart beat. Stop all funding of Viner’s creative writing. Better yet stop all funding for climate related research! If there is no money in finding a problem then there will be no problem.

    • Philip Finck says:

      I respectively disagree with the idea of stopping climate related research funding. Rather, `somehow’, it must be ensured that the research is unbiased, that all avenues of research are funded, and that individual groups of scientists do not have to much control on where and how the money is spent. It also needs to be insured that the research isn’t myopic in nature

      There are many types of research and there are always very powerful groups that lobby against any one particular type of research. An example that pops to mind is space exploration (in it’s broadest sense). Many people think that it is a waste of money and should be discontinued. Others like myself strongly support it….. should have been on Mars 20 years ago.

      It is very dangerous to cut funding because a group disagrees with the outcome.

      • PearlandAggie says:

        Very true. Of course, this also ignores whether or not we can actually afford to finance said research.

      • suyts says:

        Grumpy probably meant to temporarily withhold funding until unbiased researchers could be found……. I’m guessing if we stopped the youth indoctrination now, we could probably find some in about 25-30 years.

      • Justa Joe says:

        It depends what is getting funded. In the case of AGW it is clear that the funds would bet better spent on, for example, space exploration.

      • Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

        Climate research has been research for the purpose of doing research since it started. The common result of most research programs is that more research is required and they are no further in understanding weather than they were 200 years ago.
        Funding projects to fix know problems is fine if the discretionary funds are available. But wasting money to create imaginary problems that require more money to research them is just wasting money.
        There is NO reason for Space Exploration when more urgent problems exist. It is likely we spend more money chasing and creating fantasies than we do confronting real world problems. We actually spend money that promotes people living in harmful conditions!

      • No, pretty much all of climate research could be ably carried on the realm of physics or meteorology by the people who are already doing good research.

      • Grumpy Grampy ;) says:

        Dirk:
        What an extreme concept! Having real scientists and real experienced meteorologists doing research on weather . What will people think of next. Someone may actually try to have a balanced government budget! Unheard of!

  4. suyts says:

    “These positive feedbacks with landmasses weren’t known about then.”
    ===========================================

    lmao…. poor dumb superstitious buffoons way back in 2001.

  5. gator69 says:

    This is the same fool that uttered this nonsense…

    “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is…”

    Completely delusional.

  6. In ten years children won’t know who David Viner was.

  7. Dave N says:

    “..there’s no brakes you can apply”

    Well of course, that’s why when CO2 levels were much higher in the past, and when temps were much higher in the past (and at times when humans could not have had any influence), they never came down.

    Add another “expert” to the moron list.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s