Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 3
Discussion
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/31/old-water-t...
you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
Otispunkmeyer said:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/31/old-water-t...
you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
There'll be an adjustment along shortly to turn on Schrödinger's Tap. It's a Hot Tap btw.
I was in M&S Food Hall this morning and the till operator, always courteous and friendly, said to me (noticing my Regatta waterproof, zipped and buttoned against the cold rain) "Bet you thought you'd put that coat away for this year, didn't you?"
After agreeing with him I commented: "But still, I bet they'll still say it's the warmest May ever!"
"They did, last night on Countryfile!"
After agreeing with him I commented: "But still, I bet they'll still say it's the warmest May ever!"
"They did, last night on Countryfile!"
Otispunkmeyer said:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/05/31/old-water-t...
you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
So it's sort of like my hot water tank then.you know how the pause was because all the heat was hiding in the deep ocean? Turns out the deep ocean now houses old pre-machine age water that is nice and cold.
Maybe they can employ some kind of shroedinger thing... The water is both simultaneously hot and cold. Until someone checks. Which they won't.
Filled by cold water at the bottom, heated from the bottom up by the water from the boiler leaving the warm water at the top just like the North Pole.
Ergo there must be some sort of "pipe" running through the centre of the earth. Probably releases heated water in the South Atlantic where it flows upwards in what we call the Gulf Stream and melts the arctic. I expect there is a bit of direct feedback thought the out-take "pipe" as well to provide general background warmth - which is probably why most of what we call the "landmass" is in the upper hemisphere.
See, simple to come up with a theory. Not so easy to prove it.
Probably wrong but just as likely as any other theory (said tongue slightly in cheek) given the current state of new papers.
Jo Nova has got some amusing comments on the old-cold-water, how the fake scientists call sceptics deniers for pointing out things that don't fit the theory, but the warmists still 'solve' the 'conundrum', and in so doing inadvertently show that global warming can't actually be a problem anyway, but don't really mention that. So it's now Regional warming! global warming/climate change/climate chaos . It really is hilarious watching them tie themselves in knots, oh what a tangles web........
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/05/nature-finally-fi...
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/05/nature-finally-fi...
Today CC Beeb Puff piece:-
Renewable energy surges to record levels around the world
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3642...
"The fact that we had 147GW of capacity, mainly of wind and solar is a clear indication that these technologies are cost competitive (with fossil fuels)," said Christine Lins, who is executive secretary of REN21, an international body made up of energy experts, government representatives and NGOs, who produced the report.
I suspect when the data & figures is looked at by those not wearing rose coloured glasses, it'll turn out to be complete b
ks again
Renewable energy surges to record levels around the world
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3642...
"The fact that we had 147GW of capacity, mainly of wind and solar is a clear indication that these technologies are cost competitive (with fossil fuels)," said Christine Lins, who is executive secretary of REN21, an international body made up of energy experts, government representatives and NGOs, who produced the report.
I suspect when the data & figures is looked at by those not wearing rose coloured glasses, it'll turn out to be complete b
ks againmotco said:
'Today' on BBC R4 is saying this morning that the UK obtained a quarter of its energy (electricity I assume, not including gas) from renewables for the first quarter of this year.
I was gobsmacked when I heard that blatent lie.I often take a look at http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm and I don't think that I have ever seen renewables hit 25%.
As expected the global plunge in temperature, now the El Nino is dead, has really begun........
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/01/the-planet-...
Below normal Tornado season too, in the hottest year ever, that's got to be the final insult!
And Morano debates nutjob book burner on Fox News.
https://youtu.be/DEzUWAbvcrE
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/01/the-planet-...
Below normal Tornado season too, in the hottest year ever, that's got to be the final insult!
And Morano debates nutjob book burner on Fox News.
https://youtu.be/DEzUWAbvcrE
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Wednesday 1st June 22:23
robinessex said:
Today CC Beeb Puff piece:-
Renewable energy surges to record levels around the world
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3642...
"The fact that we had 147GW of capacity, mainly of wind and solar is a clear indication that these technologies are cost competitive (with fossil fuels)," said Christine Lins, who is executive secretary of REN21, an international body made up of energy experts, government representatives and NGOs, who produced the report.
I suspect when the data & figures is looked at by those not wearing rose coloured glasses, it'll turn out to be complete bks again
There is also of course that report looking at wind power in the uk that suggests despite a trippling in capacity we, on average, don't actually get any more leccy from it. Renewable energy surges to record levels around the world
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3642...
"The fact that we had 147GW of capacity, mainly of wind and solar is a clear indication that these technologies are cost competitive (with fossil fuels)," said Christine Lins, who is executive secretary of REN21, an international body made up of energy experts, government representatives and NGOs, who produced the report.
I suspect when the data & figures is looked at by those not wearing rose coloured glasses, it'll turn out to be complete b
ks againI just don't understand really why we've persisted with wind. I mean its mostly illogical what they trying to do with it. Trying to forcibly bend it to fit a usage pattern it is just not suited to.
Otispunkmeyer said:
There is also of course that report looking at wind power in the uk that suggests despite a trippling in capacity we, on average, don't actually get any more leccy from it.
I just don't understand really why we've persisted with wind. I mean its mostly illogical what they trying to do with it. Trying to forcibly bend it to fit a usage pattern it is just not suited to.
On the fracking thread;I just don't understand really why we've persisted with wind. I mean its mostly illogical what they trying to do with it. Trying to forcibly bend it to fit a usage pattern it is just not suited to.
hidetheelephants said:
The French managed to build enough nuclear power stations to generate 70+% of their electricity in less than 20 years; it's taken 15 years for UK wind power to reach the heady heights of 9%. Which of these is a practical solution and which is an act of unpardonable folly?
Further to that I had a look to see what the French programme cost; EDF reckon the capital bill was about £55bn corrected for inflation, UK wind power capital expenditure is over £100bn.Mr GrimNasty said:
As expected the global plunge in temperature, now the El Nino is dead, has really begun........
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/01/the-planet-...
Below normal Tornado season too, in the hottest year ever, that's got to be the final insult!
And Morano debates nutjob book burner on Fox News.
https://youtu.be/DEzUWAbvcrE
That's the whole problem in a nutshell. These brain dead biblical CC zealots get themselves in a position to use their crazy belief in a totally undemocratic manner, while those who have a much more balanced and sensible view don’t bother, and we thus end of with complete bhttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06/01/the-planet-...
Below normal Tornado season too, in the hottest year ever, that's got to be the final insult!
And Morano debates nutjob book burner on Fox News.
https://youtu.be/DEzUWAbvcrE
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Wednesday 1st June 22:23
ks decisions influenced by deluded idiots.Todays BEEB CC puff piece:-
Can baking soda save the world?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3641...
US researchers are testing a key ingredient of baking soda as a way of capturing carbon dioxide from power stations.
The scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, have developed liquid microcapsules and sponges which can absorb CO2 more efficiently and at a lower cost than current methods.
So, if this enables large quantities of CO2 to be absorbed, how before the bloody planet starts to freeze? Not that CO2 actually has any effect on the planets temperature anyway.
Can baking soda save the world?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3641...
US researchers are testing a key ingredient of baking soda as a way of capturing carbon dioxide from power stations.
The scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, have developed liquid microcapsules and sponges which can absorb CO2 more efficiently and at a lower cost than current methods.
So, if this enables large quantities of CO2 to be absorbed, how before the bloody planet starts to freeze? Not that CO2 actually has any effect on the planets temperature anyway.
robinessex said:
Todays BEEB CC puff piece:-
Can baking soda save the world?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3641...
US researchers are testing a key ingredient of baking soda as a way of capturing carbon dioxide from power stations.
The scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, have developed liquid microcapsules and sponges which can absorb CO2 more efficiently and at a lower cost than current methods.
So, if this enables large quantities of CO2 to be absorbed, how before the bloody planet starts to freeze? Not that CO2 actually has any effect on the planets temperature anyway.
More likely that plants, really starting to enjoy a little extra CO2 these days, would revert to lower growth and yields. In which case the CO2 uptake they offer would be forfeit .... and so more "baking soda" would be required ..... and so the circle goes.Can baking soda save the world?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3641...
US researchers are testing a key ingredient of baking soda as a way of capturing carbon dioxide from power stations.
The scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, have developed liquid microcapsules and sponges which can absorb CO2 more efficiently and at a lower cost than current methods.
So, if this enables large quantities of CO2 to be absorbed, how before the bloody planet starts to freeze? Not that CO2 actually has any effect on the planets temperature anyway.
Can anyone come up with any large scale "intervention" by "human engineering" of the biosphere that has been non-harmful in any way? If it has also been effective for intended purpose you get double points.
Edited by LongQ on Thursday 2nd June 17:41
NALOPKT does an excellent job of dismantling the BBC renewables propaganda.
Valid headlines would also be:
UK renewables 'surge' from 1.2 to 1.6%.
Global renewables 'surge' from 2% to errrrrrr, 2%.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
Valid headlines would also be:
UK renewables 'surge' from 1.2 to 1.6%.
Global renewables 'surge' from 2% to errrrrrr, 2%.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Thursday 2nd June 13:26
Mr GrimNasty said:
NALOPKT does an excellent job of dismantling the BBC renewables propaganda.
Valid headlines would also be:
UK renewables 'surge' from 1.2 to 1.6%.
Global renewables 'surge' from 2% to errrrrrr, 2%.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
It's difficult to believe that the BBC would spin it.Valid headlines would also be:
UK renewables 'surge' from 1.2 to 1.6%.
Global renewables 'surge' from 2% to errrrrrr, 2%.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...
Steve Goddard, aka Tony Hill, poster child of skeptics, has gone awol
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/05/arctic-non-m...
"I will continue to track this, because I don’t trust any government agency anymore."
Only because it has gone against what he was preaching last year.
Tony picked up on the DMI arctic graph as it fitted his belief before the summer melt last year. He said it would be similar to 2006 for an Arctic minima on extent and then it was a lot lower. Then he shifted his gaze to the Arctic putting on a lot more ice, due to a wonky graph at DMI. Which they have explained subsequently. Something I picked up straight away, but which they, wanting values to prove their world view, ignored. Until it really went bananas and was obviously a web updated graph nobody at the institute was looking at.
Then they did and told people to ignore it.
So now, they are part of the conspiracy according to Steve / Tony.
So wipe out RealclimateScience as any info from the skeptics side as they are not credible. Worse than the BBC.
From a reply I posted to a top NASA scientist last year when the graph started to go awol
"I don’t really think Steve Goddard is worth responding to - it’s really junk science. The main thing I see is that Goddard is referencing an outdated product. On the web page for the new product, it essentially says that the old product is inferior and shouldn’t be used. I don’t know why they keep the old site going.
A good indication that something is wrong with the old plot is that it is out of whack with the numerous other sources of Antarctic sea ice extent: NSIDC, NASA Goddard, JAXA, Univ. of Bremen,…and the new DMI. When several estimates agree and one is an outlier, the outlier is usually wrong."
So avoid quoting him in future unless you want a new one ripped.
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/05/arctic-non-m...
"I will continue to track this, because I don’t trust any government agency anymore."
Only because it has gone against what he was preaching last year.
Tony picked up on the DMI arctic graph as it fitted his belief before the summer melt last year. He said it would be similar to 2006 for an Arctic minima on extent and then it was a lot lower. Then he shifted his gaze to the Arctic putting on a lot more ice, due to a wonky graph at DMI. Which they have explained subsequently. Something I picked up straight away, but which they, wanting values to prove their world view, ignored. Until it really went bananas and was obviously a web updated graph nobody at the institute was looking at.
Then they did and told people to ignore it.
So now, they are part of the conspiracy according to Steve / Tony.
So wipe out RealclimateScience as any info from the skeptics side as they are not credible. Worse than the BBC.
From a reply I posted to a top NASA scientist last year when the graph started to go awol
"I don’t really think Steve Goddard is worth responding to - it’s really junk science. The main thing I see is that Goddard is referencing an outdated product. On the web page for the new product, it essentially says that the old product is inferior and shouldn’t be used. I don’t know why they keep the old site going.
A good indication that something is wrong with the old plot is that it is out of whack with the numerous other sources of Antarctic sea ice extent: NSIDC, NASA Goddard, JAXA, Univ. of Bremen,…and the new DMI. When several estimates agree and one is an outlier, the outlier is usually wrong."
So avoid quoting him in future unless you want a new one ripped.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff