Scally42

You do know he's a Democrat?

They may well give their time to the IPCC for free but that's not their day job is It? What scientists have been proven to be funded by the fossil fuels Industry? Koonin worked for BP for a while, that was a paid job, they don't pay him for what he does now

I've read quite a few books on the different aspects of the climate change debate and I think Unsettled is probably the best. Anybody who has read the book will realise that Koonin believes there is a right and a wrong way to do science and a lot of what goes on at the IPCC is dubious at best, when your paycheck depends on pushing a particular narrative it's never going to end well. Sceptics are more likely to read and do research on a subject than somebody who believes in something so therefore just listens to what the media spouts at them.

I don't get where your coming from, nobody is doubting global warming that's not up for debate. Saying some thing has low confidennce because you cannot gather the data to prove it is happening is basically saying you have no idea if it's happening or not. The IPCC cannot infer that droughts are becoming more persistent due to climate change unless they have the data to prove this. They may well be saying they have high confidance now in AR6 but they were not in AR5

You can dress it up how you like, if they say low confidence then that means low confidence. So the IPCC did not know if there was any trend in droughts since the middle of the 20th century, this is not some thing they have to predict this is what has actually happened. We're talking about 70 years not 10,000 years, they couldn't tell us some thing as basic as that with any certainty yet we're supposed to believe they can tell us what will happen in the future. We've had a lot of warming yet in 2014 they couldn't say if precipitation around the globe had been affected by this warming. 7 years later they've got all that sorted and now know exactly what's going on.

If you read Koonin's reply he debunks them and shows links to the IPCC report to back up his claims

That's the whole reason for putting the video up, if you think he's wrong then let us know how. The IPCC report is free to download

The fact is nobody has shown any evidence that what was said in that interview with Steven Koonin is not correct

I go back to this image ofthe Mer de Glace on Mont Blanc, the glacier has been melting since 1820, the Little Ice Age ended in 1850. So you and the IPCC believe that the majority of the warming since the end of the Little Ice Age is mainly human caused depsite the face that the earth would obviously have been warming considerably as we were coming out of a very cool period, the image below confirms this as as you can see the glacier has been melting since 1820. To put the blame of a warming world on humans is stretching it a bit as the world was warming before we started pumping co2 into it

Thanks for your imput, so any one who writes a book about anything is discredited because they make money out of their views. So you've no idea if he's correct in what he says then?

If you watch the video you'll see that everything he talks about is relevant to the latest IPCC Report. It's free to download, if you want to show me where in there it proves he's wrong then I'd be interested. Just taking the usual cheap shot attack on him offers nothing.

This is a great watch for anybody who wants a view on climate change that you won't get from the mainstream media

This will open up a can of worms

Just to put it into perspective and definatley something we should be helping to change https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health

Sorry but you're just another conspiracy theorist, welcome to the club.