Climate Cat out of the Bag? Potentially dynamite revelations

[turbobloke]

TankRizzo said:

YOU IDIOT WOMAN, THE FLOODING IS NOTHING TO DO WITH GLOBAL WARMING

JESUS

Correct!

These flood lies are beyond a joke.

Singular extreme weather events CANNOT be linked to climate change for a number of reasons not least the very wide range of natural variability.

Flooding was worse in the past.

18 July 1955: nearly 12 inches of rain fell in 24 hours over parts of Dorset
29 May 1920: a sudden 5 inches of rain fell on Louth in only 3 hours, almost razing the town and killing 23 people in less than an hour.
Both occurred at lower and much lower carbon dioxide levels. No causality anywhere to be seen.

More generally:

UK

Summer 2007 Floods: A Very Singular Event - 11th March 2008

A new scientific study of the wet summer of 2007 confirms that the floods were a very singular event and does not support the idea that the exceptional river flooding was linked to climate change. This conclusion is contained within a comprehensive hydrological appraisal of the summer 2007 floods carried out by scientists from the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology.

The new report, The summer 2007 floods in England and Wales − a hydrological appraisal, brings together both flood and meteorological data and systematically breaks down the series of events leading to extensive river flooding, which had no close modern parallel for the June-August period across the UK.

Lead author, Terry Marsh, comments: “The river floods of summer 2007 were a very singular episode, which does not form part of any clear historical trend or show consistency with currently favoured climate change scenarios.” (my emphasis)

The report complements a recent paper on flood trends in the UK, which was led by Jamie Hannaford at the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and published in the International Journal of Climatology late in 2007.

Mr Marsh continues: “Extreme flooding in the UK is historically rare but vulnerability to flooding has increased markedly as a consequence of floodplain development. This is despite increased resilience to flood risk through improved flood alleviation strategies and more sophisticated flood warning capabilities.”

The new study is an output from the National Hydrological Monitoring Programme (NHMP), operated jointly by the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and the British Geological Survey.

Full Report

EU

Prof Pielke Jr said:

J. I. Barredo of the European Commission published an interesting paper earlier this year titled, "Normalized Flood Losses in Europe: 1970-2006" (PDF) in the open access journal Natural hazards and Earth System Sciences of the EGU. The study looks at a relatively short period, 37 years, but its findings are interesting nonetheless. Here are a few excerpts (emphasis added):

Following the conceptual approach of previous studies, we normalised flood losses by considering the effects of changes in population, wealth, and inflation at the country level. Furthermore, we removed inter-country price differences by adjusting the losses for purchasing power parities (PPP). We assessed normalised flood losses in 31 European countries. These include the member states of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Croatia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Results show no detectable sign of human-induced climate change in normalised flood losses in Europe. The observed increase in the original flood losses is mostly driven by societal factors.

That's it. No evidence whatsoever for the flood-related glandular brain-dead utterances of gullible or culpable fools.

Edited by turbobloke on Thursday 26th November 23:41

[Westy Pre-Lit]

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumI...

I've had my say and it got posted

[JohnnyPanic]

Westy Pre-Lit said:

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumI...

I've had my say and it got posted

A little bit verbose, but a good point

[JohnnyPanic]

Talking about it on This Week on BBC1 now

ETA: Over now ... that was long lasting!

Edited by JohnnyPanic on Thursday 26th November 23:46

[srebbe64]

It's getting discussed on This Week - Portillo is talking sense!

[JohnnyPanic]

srebbe64 said:

It's getting discussed on This Week - Portillo is talking sense!

I think that's why that had to cut it to 30 seconds!

[Westy Pre-Lit]

JohnnyPanic said:

Westy Pre-Lit said:

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumI...

I've had my say and it got posted

A little bit verbose, but a good point

It's the only way these tossers understand

Edited by Westy Pre-Lit on Thursday 26th November 23:50

[Russ35]

The best exclamation\description I've heard for the Cumbria floods has come from Professor Philip Stott over on his The Clamour Of The Times blogg

There was no mention of the emails on Radio 4's 'Home Planet' yesterday afternoon where Prof. Stott is one of the panel, but he make comments on them on his blogg.

[Romanymagic]

I feel a poll coming on (if you know what I mean).

I have been a staunch advocate of the "humanity is too insignificant" to have such an affect on a planet that we have only inhabited for zilch seconds scheme of things, I still stand by that. All of this "Climategate" shennanigans just backs up my original stance. I thinks this whole debacle has just been a good excuse to tax the multitude on many levels.

A great argument over CO2 occurred the other day when it was suggested that the carnivore's were responsible for increased CO2 due to the love of "cow meat" that prior to being eaten produced huge amounts of CO2...OMG! That'll be it then, of course if our government decides to expand an airport run way to allow more planes to land in the UK then that is ok cos the planes all run on carrot juice/fairy dust/unquantifiable power that will, if anything polish the atmosphere and make it all good again stuff...

I still stand by the other theory on this, we are actually going into an ice age...Green land, used to be just that but is now a frozen wasteland, the planet is effectively moving into its next ice age, the change in climate is part of the effect...I like that cos it will get right up the nose of the climate theorists.

[dangerousB]

whoami said:

dangerousB said:

I'll try.
I had no idea who Marcus Brigstock was before the programme started and I no longer care.
Nicola Sturgeon was as nauseating as she always is, David Davis was insipid and hinted, but didn't speak what he felt he should enunciate.
Charlie Faulkner . . . well, words could only just touch on the vitriol I feel for that . . .
The bird from The Daily Mail was spot on, but unfortunately the hand picked audience (as it would appear from the derision that ensued) didn't agree.
What did you expect from the BBC?

How do you know?

How could I? That was certainly my impression though. Gauged the audience and addressed his answer accordingly. Predictable as it is reprehensible.

[grumbledoak]

Westy Pre-Lit said:

I've had my say and it got posted

Doubt mine will be.

[-Pete-]

QT showed once again how easily people are brainwashed, good question, scripted or avoiding-the-question answers.

I found info on someone who reminds me a lot of somebody on PH
and here too which may help people to understand his opinions a little better.

ETA:I just found this link too.

Ludo, I don't suppose you're Gavin Harper?

Edited by -Pete- on Friday 27th November 00:47

[hidetheelephants]

dangerousB said:

whoami said:

dangerousB said:

I'll try.
I had no idea who Marcus Brigstock was before the programme started and I no longer care.
Nicola Sturgeon was as nauseating as she always is, David Davis was insipid and hinted, but didn't speak what he felt he should enunciate.
Charlie Faulkner . . . well, words could only just touch on the vitriol I feel for that . . .
The bird from The Daily Mail was spot on, but unfortunately the hand picked audience (as it would appear from the derision that ensued) didn't agree.
What did you expect from the BBC?

How do you know?

How could I? That was certainly my impression though. Gauged the audience and addressed his answer accordingly. Predictable as it is reprehensible.

I imagine he would hold back from going into it in detail because:

1. Dimblebum would probably interrupt, or the audience would form a lynch mob and hang him as an apostate.
2. He entertains hopes of a Cabinet seat when CMD wins the election, and the official CMD line is that green is in fashion this year...

[otolith]

I recorded QT but unfortunately can't watch it - Brigstock is on it. I have an expensive TV, and that slimy, sanctimonious little ct makes me throw things.

[Hedders]

otolith said:

I recorded QT but unfortunately can't watch it - Brigstock is on it. I have an expensive TV, and that slimy, sanctimonious little ct makes me throw things.

If he annoys you normally, you definately don't want to see this performance!

[freecar]

otolith said:

I recorded QT but unfortunately can't watch it - Brigstock is on it. I have an expensive TV, and that slimy, sanctimonious little ct makes me throw things.

Oh go on, you'll love it!

He says rather sanctimoniously "I've been to the artic twice and could see the ice had disappeared" or words to that effect! I wanted to throw something! I have a projector though so wouldn't be a problem other than for the dent in the wall!

Worst thing about it was feeling solidarity for a mail journalist, made me feel dirty inside!

[deeps]

turbobloke said:

In terms of climate impact rather than purely for solar astronomy it's more helpful to look at the entire cycle from maximum to minimum and then on once more - as the full magnetic cycle is equal to two visible cycles - rather than a single spot or spot group development. There are also several features such as coronal holes that are part of solar eruptivity, as opposed to irradiance. + lots of interesting stuff

Cheers TB, I'll look through those links tomorrow

[Funk]

QT panellists are useless.

You can't link individual events to 'global warming', and there has been sufficient evidence to utterly discredit the 'research' that has been trumpeted. Many of the 'facts' touted on the show are based on the shonky work carried out by the discredited scientists.

This hasn't even really begun to get going - I'm sure we'll see the crumbling of the AGWists and it will, as so many things do, start in the US. The UK Government will continue to pretend it's real (just like the BBC are).

[jgmadkit]

freecar said:

Oh go on, you'll love it!

He says rather sanctimoniously "I've been to the artic twice and could see the ice had disappeared" or words to that effect! I wanted to throw something! I have a projector though so wouldn't be a problem other than for the dent in the wall!

Worst thing about it was feeling solidarity for a mail journalist, made me feel dirty inside!

Yes, he'd seen first hand ice melting therefore climate change was happening. Indeed 2009 was the fifth hottest on record, (was I away for the blistering summer this year) which was conclusive proof. And the audience clapped and nodded but further proof came when a distinguished member of the audience also pointed out that Cockermouth was also as a result of climate change. As if we were'nt already convinced. The audience clapped and nodded some more. The end.

[deeps]

VxDuncan said:

JohnnyPanic said:

Well said man in the stripey shirt!

TB cleans up well doesn't he!*

• any evidence to link TB to that bloke is statistically insignificant

Quite scary the shock to the audience of the suggestion that AGW was unproven. That whole room appears to have swallowed the story hook,line and sinker.

The audience on QT are hand picked and not representative of society, there were more carefully chosen True Believers there than you could point a stick at. It's a fact that most people do not believe in Man Made-up Global Warming, yet 99% of that audience apparently did!

Just goes to show the depth of the BBC propaganda machine, and the lengths they will go to.