Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 6)
Discussion
kerplunk said:
garagewidow said:
fishseller said:
No such thing as man made climate change we are at the end of the ice age , we will go back into the ice age in the future.
Earth has been here before
" About 3 million years ago, the Earth was just a couple of degrees warmer than it is today — and global sea levels were 53 feet Higher"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level#:~:te...
its just a rouse to tax us more.
"Your name vill also go on ze list"Earth has been here before
" About 3 million years ago, the Earth was just a couple of degrees warmer than it is today — and global sea levels were 53 feet Higher"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level#:~:te...
its just a rouse to tax us more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_clowns
Diderot said:
Keep it coming Dursbter, KP and Hairy - keep trying to justify Wikipedia as a viable source. You are all most entertaining.
Really - I think it's been a rather dull and unchallenging. No real case made so not much to respond to. The highlight was turbobloke's star witness being some bozo who thinks an ice age arrived in 2015, but only for belly laughs.Edited by kerplunk on Monday 18th October 01:57
Diderot said:
Keep it coming Dursbter, KP and Hairy - keep trying to justify Wikipedia as a viable source. You are all most entertaining.
Oh phew. You've finally realised your argument is another hollow dud.durbster said:
Diderot said:
And lay off on the childish name calling it does you no favours.
The petard hoisting is usually within a couple of pages. Let's see...
Diderot said:
Just wondering KP, Is durbster on your list of Wiki clowns too?
I don't think I could have made this trap more obvious and "the academic" still walked directly into it.Diderot said:
hairykrishna said:
The reason nobody cites Wikipedia in academia is the same reason nobody cites Encyclopedia Britannia. It's not a primary source and it also only normally provides very introductory material. Not that it's not reliable. Turbobloke mostly hates it because it often provides an easy to read, layman's explanation of why he's talking nonsense.
Diderot a journal editor? Presumably not in a science discipline
Hairy, honestly, I know you are a-trying, but come now at least EBriticanica and indeed the original Collins Cyclopedia (and the Encyclopédie) were at least penned by subject experts. No one, save durbster, could claim the same about Wikipedia, surely? Diderot a journal editor? Presumably not in a science discipline
Wikipedia isn't a source that anyone would consider definitive. I am greatly amused that it's getting such ridicule when people uncritically post any old s
t that someone has published on their own blog.hairykrishna said:
Diderot said:
hairykrishna said:
The reason nobody cites Wikipedia in academia is the same reason nobody cites Encyclopedia Britannia. It's not a primary source and it also only normally provides very introductory material. Not that it's not reliable. Turbobloke mostly hates it because it often provides an easy to read, layman's explanation of why he's talking nonsense.
Diderot a journal editor? Presumably not in a science discipline
Hairy, honestly, I know you are a-trying, but come now at least EBriticanica and indeed the original Collins Cyclopedia (and the Encyclopédie) were at least penned by subject experts. No one, save durbster, could claim the same about Wikipedia, surely? Diderot a journal editor? Presumably not in a science discipline
Wikipedia isn't a source that anyone would consider definitive. I am greatly amused that it's getting such ridicule when people uncritically post any old s
t that someone has published on their own blog.Only on this thread could we have conspiracy theorists like Diderot who rubbish NASA and real scientists (unlike him) trying to say other people’s sources are dodgy.
Jeeeze can the children go home now and stop arguing over wiki ffs,
I thought this was about Climate Change and I still don't believe there is. Show some proof don't repeat the same old mantra Climate Crisis spouted by the likes of Greta, I remember the floods in the 70's I remember the Heatwave in the 70's the smog over London from pollution the frozen lakes and rivers we had proper seasons, we have less pollution in the UK now than we ever had but twice as many people cars are cleaner than ever, I was a mechanic in the 80's and the garage used to fill with smoke just driving a car in. The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles but we will end up taxed to death and scare to move Europe will go back to the dark ages frightened to flick on a light switch while Russia China India and so forth will carry on manufacturing goods using up fossil fuels to sell us crap we don't need, its like the ULEZ if it was about pollution then ban any petrol or diesel vehicles, paying to drive in shouldn't be an option. The elite will still fly around the world in private jets to tell us we need to TAX you more to stop climate change you all been had its a rouse.
https://www.livescience.com/south-pole-coldest-win...
Quote: The chill was exceptional, even for the coldest location on the planet. The average temperature at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station between April and September, a frigid minus-78 degrees (minus-61 Celsius), was the coldest on record, dating back to 1957.2 Oct 2021
fishseller said:
Jeeeze can the children go home now and stop arguing over wiki ffs,
I thought this was about Climate Change and I still don't believe there is. Show some proof don't repeat the same old mantra Climate Crisis spouted by the likes of Greta, I remember the floods in the 70's I remember the Heatwave in the 70's the smog over London from pollution the frozen lakes and rivers we had proper seasons, we have less pollution in the UK now than we ever had but twice as many people cars are cleaner than ever, I was a mechanic in the 80's and the garage used to fill with smoke just driving a car in. The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles but we will end up taxed to death and scare to move Europe will go back to the dark ages frightened to flick on a light switch while Russia China India and so forth will carry on manufacturing goods using up fossil fuels to sell us crap we don't need, its like the ULEZ if it was about pollution then ban any petrol or diesel vehicles, paying to drive in shouldn't be an option. The elite will still fly around the world in private jets to tell us we need to TAX you more to stop climate change you all been had its a rouse.
https://www.livescience.com/south-pole-coldest-win...
Quote: The chill was exceptional, even for the coldest location on the planet. The average temperature at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station between April and September, a frigid minus-78 degrees (minus-61 Celsius), was the coldest on record, dating back to 1957.2 Oct 2021
Did you actually read the rest of the article? I thought this was about Climate Change and I still don't believe there is. Show some proof don't repeat the same old mantra Climate Crisis spouted by the likes of Greta, I remember the floods in the 70's I remember the Heatwave in the 70's the smog over London from pollution the frozen lakes and rivers we had proper seasons, we have less pollution in the UK now than we ever had but twice as many people cars are cleaner than ever, I was a mechanic in the 80's and the garage used to fill with smoke just driving a car in. The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles but we will end up taxed to death and scare to move Europe will go back to the dark ages frightened to flick on a light switch while Russia China India and so forth will carry on manufacturing goods using up fossil fuels to sell us crap we don't need, its like the ULEZ if it was about pollution then ban any petrol or diesel vehicles, paying to drive in shouldn't be an option. The elite will still fly around the world in private jets to tell us we need to TAX you more to stop climate change you all been had its a rouse.
https://www.livescience.com/south-pole-coldest-win...
Quote: The chill was exceptional, even for the coldest location on the planet. The average temperature at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station between April and September, a frigid minus-78 degrees (minus-61 Celsius), was the coldest on record, dating back to 1957.2 Oct 2021
Article said:
Antarctica's frigid winter temperatures are in contrast to trends in the rest of the world, which overall recorded its fourth hottest summer. In fact, July 2021 was the hottest month ever recorded, Live Science previously reported.
"One cold winter is interesting but doesn't change the long-term trend, which is warming," Eric Steig, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington, told the Post. In the long term, Antarctica, like the rest of the world, is warming and rapidly losing sea ice.
The world's on a warming trend. 'Skeptics' like turbobloke have been promising this turn over into a cooling phase for the best part of two decades now, yet it keeps getting warmer. We know why it keeps getting warmer. Spell out exactly what would count as proof to you."One cold winter is interesting but doesn't change the long-term trend, which is warming," Eric Steig, a professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington, told the Post. In the long term, Antarctica, like the rest of the world, is warming and rapidly losing sea ice.
Another COP-out slipped under the radar - Wijngaarden and Happer 2020. This will remain well out of bounds from any politician at the COP; even though the overall message is a reasonable don't panic (how dare they) the paper's overall stance remains within the agw paradigm. We can sleep soundly knowing that some effective peer review has taken place.
W and H studied over 300000 lines from the HITRAN database and said:
At current concentrations, the forcings from greenhouse gases are saturated. The saturations of the abundant greenhouse gases H2O and CO2 are so extreme that the per-molecule forcing is attenuated by 4 orders of magnitude with respect to the optically thin values. Saturation also suppresses the forcing power per molecule of less abundant greenhouse gases
While politicians will remain blissfully ignorant, others can discuss the social and economic implications for and from our national policy set. Given our intended future where a mere £3trillion is needed to keep the lights on for a single 10-day period of dull calm, there's bound to be a lot more sloshing around for use in 'tackling' aerial fertilisation from the wicked plant, crop and tree food gas at the base of the global food chain.Even if we all accept climate change is man-made,which plenty don't,does anyone really believe we will halt it when the likes of China .....and others....are paying lip service at best ?
Before someone says what's the alternative,do nothing ?
Well yes,given what we are doing is having no effect.
Temperatures are still rising are they not,until China and the others can be persuaded to come on board the rest of the world is wasting their time
Before someone says what's the alternative,do nothing ?
Well yes,given what we are doing is having no effect.
Temperatures are still rising are they not,until China and the others can be persuaded to come on board the rest of the world is wasting their time
turbobloke said:
Another COP-out slipped under the radar - Wijngaarden and Happer 2020. This will remain well out of bounds from any politician at the COP; even though the overall message is a reasonable don't panic (how dare they) the paper's overall stance remains within the agw paradigm. We can sleep soundly knowing that some effective peer review has taken place.
Is that actually published in a journal? I ask because you make reference to peer review and I can't find it anywhere but arXiv.Do you agree with their conclusions?
Edited by hairykrishna on Monday 18th October 11:33
kerplunk said:
fishseller said:
The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles
The road is strewn with dead predictions based on 'cycles'. Meanwhile physics-based modelling is proving quite successful about the direction of travel.
PRTVR said:
kerplunk said:
fishseller said:
The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles
The road is strewn with dead predictions based on 'cycles'. Meanwhile physics-based modelling is proving quite successful about the direction of travel.
kerplunk said:
PRTVR said:
kerplunk said:
fishseller said:
The earth will start getting colder again in a few years its climate cycles
The road is strewn with dead predictions based on 'cycles'. Meanwhile physics-based modelling is proving quite successful about the direction of travel.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.
kerplunk said:
Nice guessing but wrong, the unadjusted data still show plenty warming - a bit less than the adjusted perhaps but not much - and the many cooling predictions remain a recumbent Norwegian Blue.
Is that with or without hiding a decline at any time and was anything worth looking into on the 'bodge after bodge after bodge' database?Still a good stocking filler.
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4...
The many cooling predictions posted on PH are in fact three, one from Dr T Landscheidt (ref 2030) another from Dr H Abdusamatov (ref 2050 in keeping with a solar Dalton Min projection) not forgetting Dr D Archibald (also 2030 iirc). It looks like you're suffering from a convenient form of premature adjudication. Unlike so many tens of dire agw predictions suffering from serial failure, they won't be kicked into the future.
It's getting chilly as winter approaches , keep warm while you panic.
Lots of good climate change TV tonight.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3
I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.
Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010yl3
I look forward to the discussion on it tomorrow.
Though I appreciate that Turbobloke wont be able to take participate since it's on the BBC.
turbobloke said:
The many cooling predictions posted on PH are in fact three, one from Dr T Landscheidt (ref 2030) another from Dr H Abdusamatov (ref 2050 in keeping with a solar Dalton Min projection) not forgetting Dr D Archibald (also 2030 iirc). It looks like you're suffering from a convenient form of premature adjudication. Unlike so many tens of dire agw predictions suffering from serial failure, they won't be kicked into the future.
It's getting chilly as winter approaches , keep warm while you panic.
Which was the one that predicted rapid cooling starting in 2012? It's getting chilly as winter approaches , keep warm while you panic.
PRTVR said:
So the Hiatus didn't exist and all the papers on the heat going into the deep oceans were incorrect.
(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.
'at some point' - that's not much of a prediction(even though they were peer reviewed)
The cooling predictions were logical, we are either warming or cooling, at some point there will be a switch over.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff