Andrew Bolt’s blog: IPCC claims drown in the seas:

Christopher Monckton says the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has quietly admitted to exaggerating the possible rise in sea levels. But it’s still hiding an even worse distortion:

The (IPCC’s 2007) report’s first table of figures - inserted by the IPCC’s bureaucrats after the scientists had finalized the draft, and without their consent - listed four contributions to sea-level rise. The bureaucrats had multiplied the effect of melting ice from the Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets by 10…

Until I wrote to point out the error, no one had noticed. The IPCC, on receiving my letter, quietly corrected, moved and relabeled the erroneous table… The IPCC now says the combined contribution of the two great ice-sheets to sea-level rise will be less than seven centimeters after 100 years, not seven meters imminently, and that the Greenland ice sheet (which thickened by 50 cm between 1995 and 2005) might only melt after several millennia, probably by natural causes, just as it last did 850,000 years ago. (Al) Gore, mendaciously assisted by the IPCC bureaucracy, had exaggerated a hundredfold…

At the very heart of the IPCC’s calculations lurks an error more serious than any of these. The IPCC says: “The CO2 radiative forcing increased by 20 percent during the last 10 years (1995-2005).” Radiative forcing quantifies increases in radiant energy in the atmosphere, and hence in temperature. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 in 1995 was 360 parts per million. In 2005 it was just 5 percent higher, at 378 ppm. But each additional molecule of CO2 in the air causes a smaller radiant-energy increase than its predecessor. So the true increase in radiative forcing was 1 percent, not 20 percent. The IPCC has exaggerated the CO2 effect 20-fold.

The most intriguing thing about the first error mentioned by Monckton is not just that it was made, and how. It is that no one but Monckton pointed it out.

Christopher Monckton seems to be the only one picking holes in global warming’s holy writ produced by the IPCC. This is proof that global warming enthusiasts’ vacuous calculations are merely for the goal of garnering more government money; not for the sake of ’science’.

On a tip from Brendan.

PS: For Ed Darrell in my comments section regarding DDT from Lord Monckton from his article at the Heartland foundation while he’s in Bali:

Even if the Gore/IPCC exaggerations were true, which they are not, the economic cost of trying to mitigate climate change by trying to cut our emissions through carbon trading and other costly market interferences would far outweigh any possible climatic benefit.

The international community has galloped lemming-like over the cliff twice before. Twenty years ago the UN decided not to regard AIDS as a fatal infection. Carriers of the disease were not identified and isolated. Result: 25 million deaths in poor countries.

Thirty-five years ago the world decided to ban DDT, the only effective agent against malaria. Result: 40 million deaths in poor countries. The World Health Organization lifted the DDT ban on Sept. 15 last year. It now recommends the use of DDT to control malaria. Dr. Arata Kochi of the WHO said that politics could no longer be allowed to stand in the way of the science and the data. Amen to that.

Supposedly the lemming thing is a myth and has been debunked…but it still doesn’t get rid of the question “if your friends told you to jump off a cliff, would you?” And so the environmentalists haven’t learned their lesson from one faux pas to the next. It’s repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

The only thing that’s different is SOME people actually LEARN from history. LOL