Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
turbobloke said:
Why Climate Alarmists Are Not Really Interested in Humans or the Environment
http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/4526
Reminder Why Climate Politics Is All About Taxes and Levies Not The Environment
Why are you repeating that one? It's completely out of context.http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/4526
Reminder Why Climate Politics Is All About Taxes and Levies Not The Environment
No; this is what classic is all about.
Now too low in order to get another headline? Hapless and hopeless. Spot the URL boob...inadequate models blamed for mistake.
Another model failure said:
Portugal’s Met Office has retracted its prediction that temperatures in the country could reach 50ºC — the hottest ever recorded on mainland Europe — this week, drastically revising the forecast down by 10 degrees.
In a statement, the IPMA said forecasts published to its website and app on Tuesday had been “overestimated” for the region between Melides and Vila Nova de Milfontes, and in particular the city of Sines, where temperatures were predicted to reach 50ºC on Thursday and 46°C on Friday.
The forecasts were the result of a "statistical method" applied to numeric models, it said.
The IPMA said the actual temperatures expected for these days were between 40°C and 42°C.
http://www.euronews.com/amp/2018/08/01/portugal-s-met-office-retracts-hottest-day-prediction-blames-extreme-weather-for-mistakeIn a statement, the IPMA said forecasts published to its website and app on Tuesday had been “overestimated” for the region between Melides and Vila Nova de Milfontes, and in particular the city of Sines, where temperatures were predicted to reach 50ºC on Thursday and 46°C on Friday.
The forecasts were the result of a "statistical method" applied to numeric models, it said.
The IPMA said the actual temperatures expected for these days were between 40°C and 42°C.
Now too low in order to get another headline? Hapless and hopeless. Spot the URL boob...inadequate models blamed for mistake.
Another reason why there is less balance than there should be on the BBC...
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
robinessex said:
And still we have no idea if a minute temperature rise of the planet (whatever that is) is actually a problem. Until that's answered, AGW & CC goes in my bks bin. Sorry to repeat myself, but I’ve always worked with the problem stated, then the answer.
It’s actually difficult to tell if you’re joking or not. El stovey said:
robinessex said:
And still we have no idea if a minute temperature rise of the planet (whatever that is) is actually a problem. Until that's answered, AGW & CC goes in my bks bin. Sorry to repeat myself, but I’ve always worked with the problem stated, then the answer.
It’s actually difficult to tell if you’re joking or not. Here's a bit on heatwaves from the Met
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/temperature/...
Pre-emptive action before that becomes fully climate-wanged!
The jet-stream has something to do with for those who are UK-centric (and we don't mean UKIP)
That has given rise to a far larger than 1 deg temperature rise for a prolonged period and is called 'weather'
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/temperature/...
Pre-emptive action before that becomes fully climate-wanged!
The jet-stream has something to do with for those who are UK-centric (and we don't mean UKIP)
That has given rise to a far larger than 1 deg temperature rise for a prolonged period and is called 'weather'
Ali G said:
Another reason why there is less balance than there should be on the BBC...
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
To Rupert Read it's like being asked to go on and debate with a flat-earther. He's wondering why he should waste his time. He's also wondering if giving flat-earthers oxygen is wise and by indeed a good way for the BBC to spend it's money.https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
Still, by envisaging such a debate it shows that the beeb are open to the argument - it's the Scientist who's against it.
Oh well, guess the flat-earther will just have to take his argument to some small thread in a corner of the internet.
robinessex said:
While we’re at it, can you tell me/us why the present planet temperature and CO2 is the ‘correct’ level. Both have been all over the place for the last 4.5 billion years.
Surely it's the 'correct' level because it allows us to comfortably exist. We don't want a deviation from that do we?LoonyTunes said:
Ali G said:
Another reason why there is less balance than there should be on the BBC...
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
To Rupert Read it's like being asked to go on and debate with a flat-earther. He's wondering why he should waste his time. He's also wondering if giving flat-earthers oxygen is wise and by indeed a good way for the BBC to spend it's money.https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
Still, by envisaging such a debate it shows that the beeb are open to the argument - it's the Scientist who's against it.
Oh well, guess the flat-earther will just have to take his argument to some small thread in a corner of the internet.
El stovey said:
If you had to cross the Atlantic and I gave you the choice of two ships. One was built buy an amateur and one was built by professionals, which one would you get on?
Imagine you or one of you family was ill and needed a big operation or life saving treatment.
Would you rather get medical advice from a qualified medical practitioner following medical consensus or from someone on PHs who was googling alternative medicine blogs?
hyperbole much ? how did you view the advice given by the experts pre referendum ? i was slightly surprised to see you voted leave, given the consensus from the experts was it would be a very bad thing starting the day after the vote.Imagine you or one of you family was ill and needed a big operation or life saving treatment.
Would you rather get medical advice from a qualified medical practitioner following medical consensus or from someone on PHs who was googling alternative medicine blogs?
Edited by El stovey on Thursday 2nd August 22:40
Ali G said:
Well it's actually more like asking a Greenpeace activist/philosopher to debate climate science with a Cambridge Uni Nat Sciences (PHYSICS) grad, and one of them ran away cried foul and called for fellow activists to shut down any further discussion.
It’s only like that if the green peace guy was going against consensus science (like the flat earther) and trying to do it on a car forum. Here it’s the other way around. Here you’re the flat earthers.
Unfortunately your leader has let his political views dictate his scientific views. That’s why he’s had to rely on support from you and your cult brothers rather than the vast majority of proper scientists and scientific institutions.
If you had actual evidence that consensus science was wrong, would you be publishing
Is that what fellow “Cambridge grads” like Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing or David Attenborough would do?
durbster said:
Oh no, that sounds like an appeal to authority which, according to your teachings, means I have to automatically reject everything you say. Sorry.
it might do to someone reading your snipped quote,for others reading the entire post it indicates you like avoiding the point being made.El stovey said:
Ali G said:
Well it's actually more like asking a Greenpeace activist/philosopher to debate climate science with a Cambridge Uni Nat Sciences (PHYSICS) grad, and one of them ran away cried foul and called for fellow activists to shut down any further discussion.
It’s only like that if the green peace guy was going against consensus science (like the flat earther) and trying to do it on a car forum. Here it’s the other way around. Here you’re the flat earthers.
Unfortunately your leader has let his political views dictate his scientific views. That’s why he’s had to rely on support from you and your cult brothers rather than the vast majority of proper scientists and scientific institutions.
If you had actual evidence that consensus science was wrong, would you be publishing
Is that what fellow “Cambridge grads” like Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing or David Attenborough would do?
And by the way Turing killed himself for being outside of the 'consensus' at the time.
El stovey said:
It’s only like that if the green peace guy was going against consensus science (like the flat earther) and trying to do it on a car forum.
Here it’s the other way around. Here you’re the flat earthers.
Unfortunately your leader has let his political views dictate his scientific views. That’s why he’s had to rely on support from you and your cult brothers rather than the vast majority of proper scientists and scientific institutions.
If you had actual evidence that consensus science was wrong, would you be publishingloads of spam and waffke your findings on a car forum?
Is that what fellow “Cambridge grads” like Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing or David Attenborough would do?
[Cough] Null Hypothesis[/Cough]Here it’s the other way around. Here you’re the flat earthers.
Unfortunately your leader has let his political views dictate his scientific views. That’s why he’s had to rely on support from you and your cult brothers rather than the vast majority of proper scientists and scientific institutions.
If you had actual evidence that consensus science was wrong, would you be publishing
Is that what fellow “Cambridge grads” like Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing or David Attenborough would do?
Ali G said:
Another reason why there is less balance than there should be on the BBC...
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
that is fking hilarious and shows their hypocrisy at it's worst. they complain about the credentials of the climate science "denier" that completed an undergraduate degree in Natural Science at the University of Cambridge and then champion the climate science believer that refused to go on the bbc and debate him. his credentials ? a philosopher at UEA and former Green party candidate for Cambridge. https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/08/01/scientists-u...
'No free speach, when do we want it, we want it now'
wc98 said:
hyperbole much ? how did you view the advice given by the experts pre referendum ? i was slightly surprised to see you voted leave, given the consensus from the experts was it would be a very bad thing starting the day after the vote.
Bit weird you telling people my job earlier in the thread and now how I voted on Brexit etc.But to add to your scrap book. The Brexit experts simply want continuity and the least uncertainty. I don’t want to live in a federal Europe. My dislike for living in a federal Europe is greater than my fear of short term financial uncertainty.
If I want financial advice, I’d still go to a qualified FA.
wc98 said:
that is fking hilarious and shows their hypocrisy at it's worst. they complain about the credentials of the climate science "denier" that completed an undergraduate degree in Natural Science at the University of Cambridge and then champion the climate science believer that refused to go on the bbc and debate him. his credentials ? a philosopher at UEA and former Green party candidate for Cambridge.
It really is - 'I can't possibly have a debate with that chap about this subject that I am so passionate about, because he may know more about it than me and he disagrees with me' - type of funny.It would be funny - but that appears to be the state of the debate - which is worrying.
LoonyTunes said:
robinessex said:
While we’re at it, can you tell me/us why the present planet temperature and CO2 is the ‘correct’ level. Both have been all over the place for the last 4.5 billion years.
Surely it's the 'correct' level because it allows us to comfortably exist. We don't want a deviation from that do we?Since we don't know how to make children who don't want to eat, drink, wear clothes, travel further from where they were born than they can walk to, Children who don't want to be warm in winter, and cool in summer, or have a home of their own,children who don't want computers, Ipads, cinemas, shops, schools and universities, and transport to and from them, holidays abroad, and crucially children who don't want to have children of the own, then every new human added to the planet represents a resource consuming, emissions producing entity, and we are globally increasing their net numbers at rates between 287 and 342 thousand per DAY.
How long can a finite element such as the Earth continue produce resource consuming entities such as ourselves? Are we going to breed ourselves into extinction?
We may not be able to do anything when the climate window we arrived in closes, but by giving ourselves more time, we may be able to achieve access to other planets, that will allow the continuation of the human race, All we are doing now is bringing forward in time, the point at which the earth will no longer be able to sustain our numbers, bringing forward the Soylent Green time.
Pan Pan Pan said:
We may not be able to do anything when the climate window we arrived in closes, but by giving ourselves more time, we may be able to achieve access to other planets, that will allow the continuation of the human race, All we are doing now is bringing forward in time, the point at which the earth will no longer be able to sustain our numbers, bringing forward the Soylent Green time.
Ah, but what our robin of Essex demands (again) are facts about what the earth will be like (in the future) if the temperature keeps rising. He stated ‘no conjecture’. He wants people to state what will happen in the future. Obviously this creates difficulty as we cannot travel forward in time and observe the results but he’s only going to believe any of it when someone from the future can tell him what will definitely happen.
Multiple scientific organisations have produced many predictions based on past data and their scientific knowledge but that’s not enough obviously.
What’s required are facts from the future.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff