Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 3

[Vizsla]

turbobloke said:

This morning is the first time I've heard the use of hurricane on local radio news and weather where the term storm was needed. Presumably part of the reason for using names was to make people think our storms are all extreme now and therefore the terms storm and hurricane are interchangeable, then for the crossover to creep in as per this morning where Hurricane Gertrude was announced. The BBC website is still referring to Gertie as a storm so we're not quite there yet.

Good job we didn't have climate hysteria in 1987 when we had the October 'Great Storm', they would have gone into meltdown searching their Thesaurus for suitably hyped biblical descriptions.

[turbobloke]

Agreed x2. The storm naming thing really is crass and wholly unnecessary, none of the possible motives appear sensible or reasonable - what am I missing?! Apart from True Belief and that will remain absent.

[Crush]

Don't worry, Di Caprio has flown to the Vatican to speak with Der Pope about global warming. We're saved!

Don't know why he couldn't Skype instead and be a good little warmist?

[bodhi]

turbobloke said:

Agreed x2. The storm naming thing really is crass and wholly unnecessary, none of the possible motives appear sensible or reasonable - what am I missing?! Apart from True Belief and that will remain absent.

I'm told the storm naming originally cane from the Irish MET Office, and to be fair, predicting the weather in Ireland is one of the easiest jobs in the world, as chances are, it will be raining.

Probably a facetious answer but makes more sense than any other I've heard so far...

[Jasandjules]

mybrainhurts said:

Mann must have a thick skin. How he manages to look people in the eye and maintain his self belief is quite an achievement.

One must question if it is self belief or whether many of these AGW wa***ers are simply lying through their teeth and committing fraud on a huge scale.

[Otispunkmeyer]

turbobloke said:

This morning is the first time I've heard the use of hurricane on local radio news and weather where the term storm was needed. Presumably part of the reason for using names was to make people think our storms are all extreme now and therefore the terms storm and hurricane are interchangeable, then for the crossover to creep in as per this morning where Hurricane Gertrude was announced. The BBC website is still referring to Gertie as a storm so we're not quite there yet.

Hurricane?

I have been in a few. What is happening today is merely a bit blustery.

[wc98]

turbobloke said:

Mr GrimNasty said:

Well 'they' are convinced all the heat hides in the oceans, so great, the Oceans warming 1C would suck up 1000C of atmosphere warming.

Can't say I'm worried!

Right on. Get like Dave and chillax.

Estimated values of recent oceanic heat uptake are of the order of a few tenths of a W/m2 not scary and therefore not what it should be, oceans don't read IPCC reports or The Guardian. Deep ocean cooling is where it's at, man. See: Liang, Wunsch, Heimbach and Forget (that's a name not an instruction) in JoC 2015.

does not look like too much heat is being taken up by the oceans at the moment. north east atlantic cooling becoming more widespread every week. http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2016/ano... . as noaa appear to be part of the "team" ,i wonder how much more cooling there actually is. certainly looks like the amo flipping cold .if so we better make the most of this mild winter as the next few may not be so mild.

[Mr GrimNasty]

Crush said:

Don't worry, Di Caprio has flown to the Vatican to speak with Der Pope about global warming. We're saved!

Don't know why he couldn't Skype instead and be a good little warmist?

Leonardo DiCaprio and Kelly Rohrbach have reportedly split.

"I could never be with someone who doesn't believe in climate change."

Related? Mmmmmmmmm!

Anyway - hurricanes, there is a possibility of hurricane force winds far north, as with '87, doesn't make it an actual hurricane - just ask Mr M.Fish!

[wc98]

turbobloke said:

This morning is the first time I've heard the use of hurricane on local radio news and weather where the term storm was needed. Presumably part of the reason for using names was to make people think our storms are all extreme now and therefore the terms storm and hurricane are interchangeable, then for the crossover to creep in as per this morning where Hurricane Gertrude was announced. The BBC website is still referring to Gertie as a storm so we're not quite there yet.

and to think the tax payer actually pays for people to come up with this utter ste .time for a review of met ofice funding along with the bbc.

[Mr GrimNasty]

Even NOAA's own satellite data doesn't show cause for concern & no record 2015 heat.

http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/smcd/emb/mscat/ind...

Why do they put the middle layer last, seems illogical, other than it shows the most warming, and that's the impression they want to leave the reader with?

[alock]

bodhi said:

turbobloke said:

Agreed x2. The storm naming thing really is crass and wholly unnecessary, none of the possible motives appear sensible or reasonable - what am I missing?! Apart from True Belief and that will remain absent.

I'm told the storm naming originally cane from the Irish MET Office, and to be fair, predicting the weather in Ireland is one of the easiest jobs in the world, as chances are, it will be raining.

Probably a facetious answer but makes more sense than any other I've heard so far...

I thought it was just a joke. The first was Abigail... i.e. 'a big gale'.

[Vizsla]

alock said:

bodhi said:

turbobloke said:

Agreed x2. The storm naming thing really is crass and wholly unnecessary, none of the possible motives appear sensible or reasonable - what am I missing?! Apart from True Belief and that will remain absent.

I'm told the storm naming originally cane from the Irish MET Office, and to be fair, predicting the weather in Ireland is one of the easiest jobs in the world, as chances are, it will be raining.

Probably a facetious answer but makes more sense than any other I've heard so far...

I thought it was just a joke. The first was Abigail... i.e. 'a big gale'.

Some weather twonk on the Beeb at lunchtime saying that 'the next named storm' could be on its way, arriving Tuesday.
Let's see, we're up to 'h' aren't we? ?Humbug ?Hooey ? Hokum ?Horsest ?Havinalaff

[Mr GrimNasty]

Just goes to show, Brits and Yanks aren't so gullible - yougov poll rates climate change as near bottom concern.

It's a shame our government doesn't democratically represent our REAL concerns - such as over population and energy security.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/britain-as...

Some of the comments are brilliant.

It's refreshing to know that the pro-climate change lobby, often so vocal on here trying to disrupt the thread, are not winning over public opinion.

[turbobloke]

Vizsla said:

Let's see, we're up to 'h' aren't we? ?Humbug ?Hooey ? Hokum ?Horsest ?Havinalaff

Great ideas. Somehow the real thing won't have quite the same edge...

ETA definitely not Huracan.

Edited by turbobloke on Friday 29th January 17:29

[bodhi]

alock said:

bodhi said:

turbobloke said:

Agreed x2. The storm naming thing really is crass and wholly unnecessary, none of the possible motives appear sensible or reasonable - what am I missing?! Apart from True Belief and that will remain absent.

I'm told the storm naming originally cane from the Irish MET Office, and to be fair, predicting the weather in Ireland is one of the easiest jobs in the world, as chances are, it will be raining.

Probably a facetious answer but makes more sense than any other I've heard so far...

I thought it was just a joke. The first was Abigail... i.e. 'a big gale'.

To be fair, I think it all started as a joke when the Scots christened the big storm in 2011 Hurricane Bawbag, sadly someone at the Irish Met has decided to take it seriously.

[durbster]

Mr GrimNasty said:

Just goes to show, Brits and Yanks aren't so gullible - yougov poll rates climate change as near bottom concern.

It's a shame our government doesn't democratically represent our REAL concerns - such as over population and energy security.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/britain-as...

Some of the comments are brilliant.

I guess that's indicative of how poorly science is reported by the press both here and in the US. Science only makes the mainstream press in sensationalised form here, if at all. Science usually moves with small steps but headlines must talk of giant leaps.

The Scandinavians in general are more sceptical and science-savvy in my experience, which is reflected in their culture.

Mr GrimNasty said:

It's refreshing to know that the pro-climate change lobby, often so vocal on here trying to disrupt the thread, are not winning over public opinion.

Tell me about it. They come in here, posting actual research, requesting credible sources and proper evidence. It's ridiculous. Why can't they just leave us alone so we can debate the topic by only posting the things that agree with us, no matter how tenuous!?

[powerstroke]

durbster said:

Tell me about it. They come in here, posting actual research, requesting credible sources and proper evidence. It's ridiculous. Why can't they just leave us alone so we can debate the topic by only posting the things that agree with us, no matter how tenuous!?

[Mr GrimNasty]

durbster said:

Tell me about it. They come in here, posting actual research, requesting credible sources and proper evidence. It's ridiculous. Why can't they just leave us alone so we can debate the topic by only posting the things that agree with us, no matter how tenuous!?

Prejudiced, jaundiced, delusional, moronic, as ever, that's all you ever bring. Glad I struck a nerve.

Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Friday 29th January 20:55

[turbobloke]

powerstroke said:

durbster said:

Tell me about it. They come in here, posting actual research, requesting credible sources and proper evidence. It's ridiculous. Why can't they just leave us alone so we can debate the topic by only posting the things that agree with us, no matter how tenuous!?

Reading that post from durbster the irony is at unprecedented levels and has reached a tipping point.

[Mr GrimNasty]

NOAA/NASA should be made to adhere to law of the Data Quality Act which most rational people would sense they flout.

Climate activists first, scientists second, it appears.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/01/28/300-scientis...