Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 2
Discussion
Mr GrimNasty said:
In a similar way, I would love to see in detail how the Met works out the average CET (or whatever) to declare this July equal 8th hottest since 1910 (with 1933!!!!) - are the readings taken on the same instruments, at the same intervals/times of day, with the same margins of error, from the same number of stations, in the same geographical distribution and density, in unaltered environs, if adjustments are made - what is the justification/method/quality control. I suspect it is actually impossible to reliably compare 2014 with 1933, for many if not all of those reasons, and any such declarations of warmest etc. etc. are actually impossible to make.
Don't mix UK weather with global warming, I once lost a £100 bet that it would be hotest year on record. Foolishly I chose the met UK monthly and YTD as the measure. Was all going well till August when temps dropped. IF I had chosen the Global temp I'd have won the bet, proably. Still it was a cheaper way to learn about choosing your data sets carefully, than going to a seminar ;-)
TransverseTight said:
Don't mix UK weather with global warming, I once lost a £100 bet that it would be hotest year on record. Foolishly I chose the met UK monthly and YTD as the measure. Was all going well till August when temps dropped. IF I had chosen the Global temp I'd have won the bet, proably.
Still it was a cheaper way to learn about choosing your data sets carefully, than going to a seminar ;-)
Well, Mr. GrimNasty seemed to be referring to local UK data - CET perhaps the regular example - rather than making any Global reference.Still it was a cheaper way to learn about choosing your data sets carefully, than going to a seminar ;-)
It would be nice to think that the CET, data for it having been in the public domain for some time, might be reasonably unsullied and properly administered over its life - in so far as proper and consistent management of the process might be achievable.
On the other hand the Global estimate is more than likely to be extremely sullied by many factors even before dabbling with the numbers is considered.
So yes, if you can read which way the temperature is expected to go and by whom such expectations are managed then on a puraly betting risk basis the global "temperature" would be a certain favourite to back. Especially when there is only one entrant in the race and one that basis no race is run since the winner is obvious.
Yes obviously I was just talking locally, but similar comments probably apply to every institution and every dataset globally.
As for the (Had)CET, you have more confidence than me!
"Since 1974 the data have been adjusted to allow for urban warming."
One of many potential 'issues' I suspect.
As for the (Had)CET, you have more confidence than me!
"Since 1974 the data have been adjusted to allow for urban warming."
One of many potential 'issues' I suspect.
chris watton said:
Didn't Geoffrey Lean post a blog in the DT a couple of weeks ago proclaiming that the UK heat wave is clear evidence of global warming?
If so, then it really is astonishing how supposedly intelligent journalists can be so foolish and appear so stupid. A warm spell in summer is normal and categorically not evidence for global warming - it was hardly a heatwave anyway despite furious attempts at ramping a few sunny days by labelling them as a heatwave for headline grabbing purposes. chris watton said:
Warmists love to have it both ways regarding weather/climate....
They sure do! More ice, less ice, more hurricanes, fewer hurricanes, more rainfall, less rainfall, you name it there will be weather somewhere and it's global warming everywhere.Faith is a wonderful thing
Daily Mail but....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Cl...
Essentially he seems to be admitting he is either a gash scientist who can't provide his evidence or a fraudulent scientist who can't provide his evidence.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Cl...
Essentially he seems to be admitting he is either a gash scientist who can't provide his evidence or a fraudulent scientist who can't provide his evidence.
brenflys777 said:
Daily Mail but....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Cl...
Essentially he seems to be admitting he is either a gash scientist who can't provide his evidence or a fraudulent scientist who can't provide his evidence.
Absolutely. Evidence-free-zones are a symptom of global warming http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Cl...
Essentially he seems to be admitting he is either a gash scientist who can't provide his evidence or a fraudulent scientist who can't provide his evidence.
Also I should point out that we did do this back in 2010 when the item was published...
..and there is still no warming 
through to 2014.
brenflys777 said:
Arse biscuits. Thanks turbobloke - the article I saw linked the daily mail one and I didn't check the date... so this camd up 4 years ago. Is that a blip in the evidence or a downward hockey stick of disaster in the supply of evidence!
It was definitely a tipping point for Jones The Data and far worse than previously thought!Our forests will be dead in 40 years. Have to start planting Redwoods now, apparently.
Hope the imports don't bring too many diseases with them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2717391/Wi...
Hope the imports don't bring too many diseases with them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2717391/Wi...
Unbelievable shenanigans from Lewandowsky...
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2014/8/6/qu...
Full source...
http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/more-fraud
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2014/8/6/qu...
Full source...
http://www.joseduarte.com/blog/more-fraud
Modern Solar Maximum A 'Rare & Unique Event In The Past 3000 Years' Prompting the Question: Is It The Sun After All
Usoskin et al present "the first fully adjustment-free physical reconstruction of solar activity" covering the past 3000 years, which record allowed them “to study different modes of solar activity at an unprecedented level of detail”. Their reconstruction of solar activity also displays several “distinct features” including several “well-defined Grand Minima of solar activity at ca. 770 BC, 350 BC, 680 AD, 1050 AD, 1310 AD, 1470 AD, and 1680 AD” as well as “the modern Grand Maximum (which occurred during solar cycles 19-23, i.e., 1950-2009)” which they describe as “a rare or even unique event in both magnitude and duration in the past three millennia”
CO2 Science Magazine, 06 August 2014
welcome to the wide awake club
We may be witnessing the Sun’s last dying gasps before entering into a long slumber. The impact of that slumber on Earth’s climate remains the subject of growing scientific speculation.
Jack Dini, Canada Free Press, 06 August 2014
except in believer circles where faith remains unwavering
Usoskin et al present "the first fully adjustment-free physical reconstruction of solar activity" covering the past 3000 years, which record allowed them “to study different modes of solar activity at an unprecedented level of detail”. Their reconstruction of solar activity also displays several “distinct features” including several “well-defined Grand Minima of solar activity at ca. 770 BC, 350 BC, 680 AD, 1050 AD, 1310 AD, 1470 AD, and 1680 AD” as well as “the modern Grand Maximum (which occurred during solar cycles 19-23, i.e., 1950-2009)” which they describe as “a rare or even unique event in both magnitude and duration in the past three millennia”
CO2 Science Magazine, 06 August 2014
welcome to the wide awake club
We may be witnessing the Sun’s last dying gasps before entering into a long slumber. The impact of that slumber on Earth’s climate remains the subject of growing scientific speculation.
Jack Dini, Canada Free Press, 06 August 2014
except in believer circles where faith remains unwavering
Well DECC seems to be still on a crash course towards putting out the lights.
Setting aside all the technical arguments pro and con, Drax, the UK's largest PF generating station had won a court case over eligibility for subsidy under renewable obligations re conversion of units to burn biomass .
In short in December the Govt (DECC) awarded Drax eligibility under the new scheme to convert two units for biomass. Drax have been quite open that the economics of the conversion entirely depends on Govt subsidy.
In April DECC completely and arbitrarily disqualified one of the units, overturning their previous decision.
Drax sought judicial review claiming that they needed the early funds from the RO as this would allow them to secure long term biomass contracts for supply. They could still make the conversion but there was significant risk of not being able to secure sufficient biomass and this would in turn put at risk the amount of electricity which could be generated.
The High Court found in Drax's favour, and said the DECC had misunderstood the situation and ordered the subsidy to be paid as originally agreed.
DECC appealed and have today won that appeal.
Drax will not take the matter further.
They have staked the entire future of the plant on conversion to biomass.
Comments from analysts seeing the Drax share price plunge include:-
"The events of this year raises two concerns. First, that the UK government has cooled on its enthusiasm for large scale biomass conversions. And second that as the government juggles its various energy priorities they can act arbitrarily and unpredictably."
"negative implications for the credibility of UK energy policy".
Setting aside all the technical arguments pro and con, Drax, the UK's largest PF generating station had won a court case over eligibility for subsidy under renewable obligations re conversion of units to burn biomass .
In short in December the Govt (DECC) awarded Drax eligibility under the new scheme to convert two units for biomass. Drax have been quite open that the economics of the conversion entirely depends on Govt subsidy.
In April DECC completely and arbitrarily disqualified one of the units, overturning their previous decision.
Drax sought judicial review claiming that they needed the early funds from the RO as this would allow them to secure long term biomass contracts for supply. They could still make the conversion but there was significant risk of not being able to secure sufficient biomass and this would in turn put at risk the amount of electricity which could be generated.
The High Court found in Drax's favour, and said the DECC had misunderstood the situation and ordered the subsidy to be paid as originally agreed.
DECC appealed and have today won that appeal.
Drax will not take the matter further.
They have staked the entire future of the plant on conversion to biomass.
Comments from analysts seeing the Drax share price plunge include:-
"The events of this year raises two concerns. First, that the UK government has cooled on its enthusiasm for large scale biomass conversions. And second that as the government juggles its various energy priorities they can act arbitrarily and unpredictably."
"negative implications for the credibility of UK energy policy".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff