Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
New data in the context of the statement and letter refers not to a few more years with no alarming warming, which does nothing for The Cause, but to the continued lack of established causality to anthropogenic emissions, and natural variation dominating the picture rather than rising carbon dioxide levels.
gadgetmac said:
I thought this was the politics thread?
Didn't see much politics in kerplunk's post, mate's rates it is then.The matter of a basis for key policy decisions, and the lack of it, are politics for sure. They're not making recommendations to politicians based on the data, but on climate models.
Whoever is next on the pester roster seeking opinion not el;usive and awol data with-established-causality might like to email climate scientist Prof Dessler (this was 2017 but time flies). A consensual reply would be most likely based on other statements and the parapet factor. Agreement rules OK - except it doesn't exist in that sense - and the science is settled, except that it isn't.
Climatologist and Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Texas Uni Andrew Dessler said:
The people who know the least about climate science are the ones who are most fixated on climate models. Models are the most visible part for people who don’t know much about climate science.
Meanwhile politicians are scrapping.Date: 21/09/18 National Post
TORONTO — The Ontario government has introduced legislation to scrap the Green Energy Act
turbobloke said:
Moving on to the world aspect, this was a key element of at least two of my recent posts where I pointed out that since the 'data' statement and the letter, what we've seen is three half-decent El Ninos and The Pause.
Oops you forgot there's been lots of La Ninas too, not to mention declining solar activity of course and more than a decade of you chanting 'buy damart' on these pages, alas to no avail:kerplunk said:
Oops you forgot there's been lots of La Ninas too, not to mention declining solar activity of course and more than a decade of you chanting 'buy damart' on these pages, alas to no avail:
Firstly how would you know, not having canvassed anyone on the issue 
the above empty rhetoric is as evidence-free as one would expect.Secondly of course there have been La Ninas but such events don't provide fodder for agw supporters to mislead others that it's manmade climate change as the focus is still on global warming. Dominant natural variation, what an inconvenience.
And finally in case you hadn't noticed, since 'warm and wet' UEA CRU champ Viner told us around the turn of the century that snow would be rare and children wouldn't know what it was, the UK has endured a number of severe winters including very recently, but also around the globe with snow in the Australian summer, in the desert and other places where carbon dioxide's long holiday has been felt most; links worked at the time but may have moved.
Thai authorities declare an emergency zone across more than half of the country covering 42 of 76 provinces as people were freezing to death in Thailand
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapac...
Freezing to death in India
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?st...
Freezing to death in China
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/feb/02/business/f...
Freezing to death in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Chile and Bolivia
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/07/20/southern-cone-...
Freezing to death in the USA
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/feb2003/cold-f05...
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_5803...
Freezing to death in Germany and Austria
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/26750...
Freezing to death in Romania
http://www.wavemagazine.net/arhiva/40/topic/freezi...
Freezing to Death in Poland and Belgium
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Eight_freeze_to_...
Deaths in Poland and Ukraine
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16786877
Excess winter mortality high in 2012-13
Public Health England
UK winter deaths highest since 1999
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34919149
Beast from the East brings freezing temperatures and snow to Britain
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2018/feb/...
Cooling is the new warming and agw is the new religion. Repent and believe!
A couple of alternative links for the movers giving 404.
Thailand: 2013 year saw a whopping 45 provinces declared as disaster zones...33 provinces were too cold to handle.
http://www.chiangmaicitylife.com/news/when-thailan...
http://www.thai-blogs.com/2009/01/13/winter-in-tha...
India cold wave death toll rises
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-162604...
Thailand: 2013 year saw a whopping 45 provinces declared as disaster zones...33 provinces were too cold to handle.
http://www.chiangmaicitylife.com/news/when-thailan...
http://www.thai-blogs.com/2009/01/13/winter-in-tha...
India cold wave death toll rises
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-162604...
El stovey said:
Half right TB, it’s overall warming leading to increased record weather events which might be hot or cold or wet or dry etc depending on where you are in the world.
This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
You've allowed yourself to be misled by armwavingly vague agw propaganda as 'this' has not proved to be correct. Extreme weather events are not increasing (Goklany, Pielke).
From actual science as opposed to junkscience, overall cooling is needed for more extreme weather. Take look at the storms recorded in the LIA. It's down to changes in the polar-equatorial temperature differential and overall warming reduces it. Check it out rather than swallow information pollution.
As pointed out recently with peer-reviewed paper citations providing supporting evidence, there's nothing unprecedented in the climate hype issues listed that alarmists are trying to scaremonger with.
Climate politics poli-ticks on.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/20/exclusive-t...
El stovey said:
Half right TB, it’s overall warming leading to increased record weather events which might be hot or cold or wet or dry etc depending on where you are in the world.
This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
So how do we know if the events are natural or CO2 induced ? As for it being predicted I remember the scientists prediction hot dry summers for the UK and we should start to plant Mediterranean plants in our garden, also that the Alps will suffer due to the warming with minimal snow for skiing, then to come up with any record event is due to CO2 is a cop out,with no basis in science.This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
turbobloke said:
You've allowed yourself to be misled by armwavingly vague agw propaganda as 'this' has not proved to be correct. Extreme weather events are not increasing (Goklany, Pielke).
From actual science as opposed to junkscience, overall cooling is needed for more extreme weather. Take look at the storms recorded in the LIA. It's down to changes in the polar-equatorial temperature differential and overall warming reduces it. Check it out rather than swallow information pollution.
As pointed out recently with peer-reviewed paper citations providing supporting evidence, there's nothing unprecedented in the climate hype issues listed that alarmists are trying to scaremonger with.
Climate politics poli-ticks on.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/20/exclusive-t...
“Actual science” you mean the scientific consensus reached by the scientific community vis peer review (which you’re suddenly supporting) and all the scientific institutions of any note? From actual science as opposed to junkscience, overall cooling is needed for more extreme weather. Take look at the storms recorded in the LIA. It's down to changes in the polar-equatorial temperature differential and overall warming reduces it. Check it out rather than swallow information pollution.
As pointed out recently with peer-reviewed paper citations providing supporting evidence, there's nothing unprecedented in the climate hype issues listed that alarmists are trying to scaremonger with.
Climate politics poli-ticks on.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/20/exclusive-t...
That’s actual science. What you’re selling to your cult is just political dogma based on your irrational dislike of lefties.
turbobloke said:
You've allowed yourself to be misled by armwavingly vague agw propaganda as 'this' has not proved to be correct. Extreme weather events are not increasing (Goklany, Pielke).
From actual science as opposed to junkscience, overall cooling is needed for more extreme weather. Take look at the storms recorded in the LIA. It's down to changes in the polar-equatorial temperature differential and overall warming reduces it. Check it out rather than swallow information pollution.
As pointed out recently with peer-reviewed paper citations providing supporting evidence, there's nothing unprecedented in the climate hype issues listed that alarmists are trying to scaremonger with.
Climate politics poli-ticks on.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/20/exclusive-t...
But can you misrepresent any climate scientists to back what you say?From actual science as opposed to junkscience, overall cooling is needed for more extreme weather. Take look at the storms recorded in the LIA. It's down to changes in the polar-equatorial temperature differential and overall warming reduces it. Check it out rather than swallow information pollution.
As pointed out recently with peer-reviewed paper citations providing supporting evidence, there's nothing unprecedented in the climate hype issues listed that alarmists are trying to scaremonger with.
Climate politics poli-ticks on.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/20/exclusive-t...
zygalski said:
But can you misrepresent any climate scientists to back what you say?
Exactly. Science is quoted and experts lauded and peer reviewed held up as examples in the rare occasion they back him up (or more likely he can misrepresent their work)
If it’s against him it’s all science broken and peer review in tatters and institutions politicised by agents and no consensus and scientists on the take
El stovey said:
zygalski said:
But can you misrepresent any climate scientists to back what you say?
Exactly. Science is quoted and experts lauded and peer reviewed held up as examples in the rare occasion they back him up (or more likely he can misrepresent their work)
All of the papers I've cited over the years say what I say they say in terms of the data. Interpreting that data isn't misleading anyone, you're both misleading the thread if you claim it is - and outside the pro-agw point scoring coterie I doubt you have many if any believers on that score. Any scientist will be very clear that data interpretation isn't settled and is certainly part and parcel of unsettled climate science.
Politicised scientists are a different matter as we've seen from Climategate. Following those damning revelations a Rasmussen poll asked "Did Scientists Falsify Research to Support Their Own Theories on Global Warming?". 35% of respondents opted for 'very likely' and 59% for 'somewhat likely'. Opinion can be a manbearpig sometimes.
.
Previously in this thread I said:
The other point is that in my recently posted list of peer-reviewed science which demonstrated multiply that there's nothing unprecedented in the hyped areas of politicised climate science I listed, I specifically pointed out - check the wording by all means - that I was not appealing to anybody's opinion but to the data involved.
turbobloke said:
Previously in this thread I said:
The other point is that in my recently posted list of peer-reviewed science which demonstrated multiply that there's nothing unprecedented in the hyped areas of politicised climate science I listed, I specifically pointed out - check the wording by all means - that I was not appealing to anybody's opinion but to the data involved.
That’s why you have to appeal to self authority and then use examples like the Australian PM and Trump and a list of scientific institutions nobody has heard of etc as evidence of some new changing consensus, which doesn’t exist,
El stovey said:
Half right TB, it’s overall warming leading to increased record weather events which might be hot or cold or wet or dry etc depending on where you are in the world.
This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
anyone that believes that knows absolutely nothing about the science beyond tabloid headlines written by climate science communicators. tb is fully right, extreme weather is far more prevalent in a cooler regime. the science will actually tell you that if you took a bit of time to look at it.you won't though, you will just keep parroting headlines. as the amo heads into the cool regime we will get to see first hand. This is exactly what was predicted with AGW and makes sense and has proved to be correct.
here is another question, given you voted to leave the eu against all the expert advice, what makes you ignore financial and political experts but believe 100% in climate experts ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff