Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
turbobloke said:
Lord Lawson has stepped down as the GWPF Chair and becomes Hon President. Replacing him as Chairman is Lord Donoughue, who served as a minister under Tony Blair’s government and as a senior adviser to Prime Ministers Harold Wilson and Jim Callaghan.
Excellent choice!
In other news, greenblob fears grow that the new World Bank head honcho will be Trumpistic and 'Reverse World Bank’s Climate Change Focus'.
Last but not least is a scientific comment from a scientist on the latest "Oceans ate Trenberth's missing warming' paper and false political certainty. Politicians should take note.
Oh come on Turbs (sorry I meant leader) you can’t mention scientists on here anymore without a link to a photocopy of their university PHD certificate. Tut tut.Excellent choice!
In other news, greenblob fears grow that the new World Bank head honcho will be Trumpistic and 'Reverse World Bank’s Climate Change Focus'.
Last but not least is a scientific comment from a scientist on the latest "Oceans ate Trenberth's missing warming' paper and false political certainty. Politicians should take note.
Dr David Whitehouse said:
Measuring ocean heat content is a subject struggling with inadequate data. It involves measuring the temperature of vast oceans (indeed reducing them to one temperature) to an accuracy at the limits of our ability to detect, in some cases a thousandth of a degree. Measurements that are made with no real understanding of the errors be they random or systematic.
dickymint said:
turbobloke said:
Lord Lawson has stepped down as the GWPF Chair and becomes Hon President. Replacing him as Chairman is Lord Donoughue, who served as a minister under Tony Blair’s government and as a senior adviser to Prime Ministers Harold Wilson and Jim Callaghan.
Excellent choice!
In other news, greenblob fears grow that the new World Bank head honcho will be Trumpistic and 'Reverse World Bank’s Climate Change Focus'.
Last but not least is a scientific comment from a scientist on the latest "Oceans ate Trenberth's missing warming' paper and false political certainty. Politicians should take note.
Oh come on Turbs (sorry I meant leader) you can’t mention scientists on here anymore without a link to a photocopy of their university PHD certificate. Tut tut.Excellent choice!
In other news, greenblob fears grow that the new World Bank head honcho will be Trumpistic and 'Reverse World Bank’s Climate Change Focus'.
Last but not least is a scientific comment from a scientist on the latest "Oceans ate Trenberth's missing warming' paper and false political certainty. Politicians should take note.
Dr David Whitehouse said:
Measuring ocean heat content is a subject struggling with inadequate data. It involves measuring the temperature of vast oceans (indeed reducing them to one temperature) to an accuracy at the limits of our ability to detect, in some cases a thousandth of a degree. Measurements that are made with no real understanding of the errors be they random or systematic.
dickymint said:
...without a link to a photocopy of their university PHD certificate
Oops
Threaders may have spotted that NASA alarmists are hyping ice loss mass in Antarctica compared to the 70s. The study looks at data from 1992. Where's the 70s data?
Only 3 years ago with much of the same data they reckoned it was actually gaining ice mass.
Peer reviewed science (Joughin and Tulaczyk, Wingham et al) found the same.
There's at least one paper discussing origins which points to ocean circulation patterns rather than holidaying tax gas.
Convincing alarmism; we must panic!
EPA Whistle-blower ‘Urgent Need for a Formal Reevaluation of Climate Alarmist Scam Science’ – CO2 has no significant effect on temperatures’
Carbon dioxide holiday snaps will not suffice
No PhD cert available but Dr Alan Carlin said:
In the last few years the literature has blossomed with more and more seriously damning studies from a climate alarmist viewpoint. Two weeks ago I outlined the nature of the costs being incurred to meet the desires of climate alarmists to reduce human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide. It is becoming increasingly evident that increases in emissions of CO2 have had no significant effect on temperatures, and that assumptions made by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in related issues fail tests based on the scientific method and sophisticated econometric tests.
Don't take his word for it, check out credible empirical data Carbon dioxide holiday snaps will not suffice
gadgetmac said:
Well if you do have a PhD they must be giving them away in corn flake packets nowadays.
Dunno, I got mine in 2003. The candidates I'm currently supervising eat muesli or toast generally. gadgetmac said:
And I don't believe you anyway.
It's ok, I'm not exactly going to lose any sleep over it. gadgetmac said:
As you deniers are keen to say every 5 minutes "Nullius in versa".
Well, unlike the fantastical and imaginary tale of CAGW, empirical data exists. gadgetmac said:
My qualifications? That's irrelevant, I'm not the one questioning the climate scientists studies.
Why so defensive? You're not a boiler engineer perchance? 
turbobloke said:
EPA Whistle-blower ‘Urgent Need for a Formal Reevaluation of Climate Alarmist Scam Science’ – CO2 has no significant effect on temperatures’
Carbon dioxide holiday snaps will not suffice
Yep, he has a PhD, it's in economics.No PhD cert available but Dr Alan Carlin said:
In the last few years the literature has blossomed with more and more seriously damning studies from a climate alarmist viewpoint. Two weeks ago I outlined the nature of the costs being incurred to meet the desires of climate alarmists to reduce human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide. It is becoming increasingly evident that increases in emissions of CO2 have had no significant effect on temperatures, and that assumptions made by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in related issues fail tests based on the scientific method and sophisticated econometric tests.
Don't take his word for it, check out credible empirical data Carbon dioxide holiday snaps will not suffice
It's not his credentials that I'm questioning though...
...it's the bunch of cultist deniers using pseudonyms on an internet forum rubbishing real climate scientists studies/findings. Occasionally using arguments like "he should have looked up the temperature on Google".
durbster said:
freecar said:
I did it because he was a 
(I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.
Eek, then nobody is safe. (I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.
dickymint said:
durbster said:
freecar said:
I did it because he was a (I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.
Eek, then nobody is safe. (I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
durbster said:
freecar said:
I did it because he was a (I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.
Eek, then nobody is safe. (I hope the swear filter worked there!) he added nothing to the debate and was content with just repeating the same diatribe over and over and it was pointless. Clearly an attempt at killing the thread with noise.It's actually YOU that plays 'Wack O Mole' on the report button as a childish tit for tat vendetta since Paddy and Murphys demise. Would you like me to illuminate you further on this...............
gadgetmac said:
I might add that Paddy and Murphy was permanently banned simply for telling someone to f*** off.
Hopefully you’ll receive similar treatment for this. We’ll see.
Hopefully you’ll receive similar treatment for this. We’ll see.
gadgetmac said:
Er, that's not me reporting him. Failure to understand isn't uncommon amongst you deniers though.
Er ,typical Gadgey trick answering without quoting!I was actually referring to the ‘Paddy’ incident!
You’re not man/woman enough to admit to hitting the button anyway.
Anyway care to adress the Paddy issue?
Talking about the GWPF...
Article said:
Perhaps the lesson to come out of this is simple; just like climate alarmists change the narrative to “stay fresh” The Global Warming Policy Foundation might change it’s name to “The Climate Change Policy Foundation” to take advantage of more search traffic.
In the “physician, heal thyself” mode of self reflection, maybe “Watts Up With Climate Change” would be a better choice too.
Interestingly, “climate crisis” has made a resurgence in 2018.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/16/hump-day-hilarity-the-progression-of-climate-narrative-names/?fbclid=IwAR0BCdejMVdr2swMHqTy0DJjwEUcTLGOhWUduxQ3tLONUPpwiMBfqaOCnfcIn the “physician, heal thyself” mode of self reflection, maybe “Watts Up With Climate Change” would be a better choice too.
Interestingly, “climate crisis” has made a resurgence in 2018.
Article said:
From the “with models, we can make anything believable” department.
New paper argues for a stronger influence of Arctic sea-ice loss on recent Eurasian cooling, thus causing colder winters and more snow in Europe due to climate change.
New paper argues for a stronger influence of Arctic sea-ice loss on recent Eurasian cooling, thus causing colder winters and more snow in Europe due to climate change.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/16/claim-globa...
The comments section is always where it's at, BS meets reality every time! "The final test of truth is ridicule. Very few dogmas have ever faced it and survived."
Commenter said:
We’ve been modelling away hard and by using turtles we have been able to show conclusively that Global Warming will result in colder winters and much more snow, especially in Europe. Already the grants are coming in to us.
Commenter said:
Nature has been so uncooperative with their predictions that they’ve segued into ad hoc explainism.
Commenter said:
“Hybrid analysis of observations and multi-model ensembles”… means they mixed bull st with facts.
t with facts.Commenter said:
It is indeed Humpty Dumpty science meaning Global Warming will be whatever they want it to mean. In 2017 a Swiss study forecast:
"The new research, by scientists based at the Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research (SLF) and at the CRYOS Laboratory at the École Polytechnique Fédérale in Switzerland, shows that the Alps could lose as much as 70% of snow cover by the end of the century. However, if humans manage to keep global warming below 2°C, the snow-cover reduction would be limited to 30% by 2100."
"The new research, by scientists based at the Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research (SLF) and at the CRYOS Laboratory at the École Polytechnique Fédérale in Switzerland, shows that the Alps could lose as much as 70% of snow cover by the end of the century. However, if humans manage to keep global warming below 2°C, the snow-cover reduction would be limited to 30% by 2100."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff