Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 7)
Discussion
durbster said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
We need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're generating.
Why? The planets had much higher levels in the past, in fact, we're currently almost at the lowest levels it's ever been. You're essentially a religious fanatic - you have no interest in answers based in reality. You just want to believe your fiction.
dickymint said:
Classic Durbster 'projection' as is your "attention seeking" comment earlier - nearly all your posts contain an element of this trait. Weird thing is though you seem to do it consciously so maybe 'hypocrite' may be a better fit?
Here he is, always looking for an opportunity for a personal attack.Projection of what? Give an example of my hypocrisy.
Essarell said:
mike9009 said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
We need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're generating.
Why? The planets had much higher levels in the past, in fact, we're currently almost at the lowest levels it's ever been. I find a graph is very useful to show this
Ohh, I forgot, you don't like this one, so here's another:-
Edited by robinessex on Thursday 28th November 12:18
The Geologic Calendar is a scale in which the geological timespan of the Earth is mapped onto a calendrical year; that is to say, the day one of the Earth took place on a geologic January 1 at precisely midnight, and today's date and time is December 31 at midnight.[1] On this calendar, the inferred appearance of the first living single-celled organisms, prokaryotes, occurred on a geologic February 25 around 12:30 pm to 1:07 pm,[2] dinosaurs first appeared on December 13, the first flower plants on December 22 and the first primates on December 28 at about 9:43 pm. The first anatomically modern humans did not arrive until around 11:48 p.m. on New Year's Eve, and all of human history since the end of the last ice-age occurred in the last 82.2 seconds before midnight of the new year.
Strangely none of the "clean" changes we have made over the last 40 years have made a rats arse of difference. Funny that.
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
durbster said:
dickymint said:
Classic Durbster 'projection' as is your "attention seeking" comment earlier - nearly all your posts contain an element of this trait. Weird thing is though you seem to do it consciously so maybe 'hypocrite' may be a better fit?
Here he is, always looking for an opportunity for a personal attack.Projection of what? Give an example of my hypocrisy.
Edit: I'm not playing your game so no need to reply.
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
Tom8 said:
Essarell said:
mike9009 said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
We need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're generating.
Why? The planets had much higher levels in the past, in fact, we're currently almost at the lowest levels it's ever been. I find a graph is very useful to show this
Ohh, I forgot, you don't like this one, so here's another:-
Edited by robinessex on Thursday 28th November 12:18
The Geologic Calendar is a scale in which the geological timespan of the Earth is mapped onto a calendrical year; that is to say, the day one of the Earth took place on a geologic January 1 at precisely midnight, and today's date and time is December 31 at midnight.[1] On this calendar, the inferred appearance of the first living single-celled organisms, prokaryotes, occurred on a geologic February 25 around 12:30 pm to 1:07 pm,[2] dinosaurs first appeared on December 13, the first flower plants on December 22 and the first primates on December 28 at about 9:43 pm. The first anatomically modern humans did not arrive until around 11:48 p.m. on New Year's Eve, and all of human history since the end of the last ice-age occurred in the last 82.2 seconds before midnight of the new year.
Strangely none of the "clean" changes we have made over the last 40 years have made a rats arse of difference. Funny that.
As they say it’s easier to fool someone than convince them they were fooled.
dickymint said:
durbster said:
dickymint said:
Classic Durbster 'projection' as is your "attention seeking" comment earlier - nearly all your posts contain an element of this trait. Weird thing is though you seem to do it consciously so maybe 'hypocrite' may be a better fit?
Here he is, always looking for an opportunity for a personal attack.Projection of what? Give an example of my hypocrisy.
Edit: I'm not playing your game so no need to reply.
turbobloke said:
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
JNW1 said:
turbobloke said:
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
Tom8 said:
Essarell said:
mike9009 said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
We need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're generating.
Why? The planets had much higher levels in the past, in fact, we're currently almost at the lowest levels it's ever been. I find a graph is very useful to show this
Ohh, I forgot, you don't like this one, so here's another:-
Edited by robinessex on Thursday 28th November 12:18
The Geologic Calendar is a scale in which the geological timespan of the Earth is mapped onto a calendrical year; that is to say, the day one of the Earth took place on a geologic January 1 at precisely midnight, and today's date and time is December 31 at midnight.[1] On this calendar, the inferred appearance of the first living single-celled organisms, prokaryotes, occurred on a geologic February 25 around 12:30 pm to 1:07 pm,[2] dinosaurs first appeared on December 13, the first flower plants on December 22 and the first primates on December 28 at about 9:43 pm. The first anatomically modern humans did not arrive until around 11:48 p.m. on New Year's Eve, and all of human history since the end of the last ice-age occurred in the last 82.2 seconds before midnight of the new year.
Strangely none of the "clean" changes we have made over the last 40 years have made a rats arse of difference. Funny that.
If all you ever do is all you've ever done, then all you'll ever get is all you've ever got. In this context, zilch, squat. nowhere fast, at an astronomical cost after so many pointless climate beanfeasts / private jetfests.
https://forums-images.pistonheads.com/18454/202411...
If only politicians like Ed Miliband had been around 8000 years ago. We're now barely a pixel up on the right.
https://x.com/clivehbest/status/178634887238375428...
Randy Winkman said:
JNW1 said:
turbobloke said:
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
JNW1 said:
turbobloke said:
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
Randy Winkman said:
JNW1 said:
turbobloke said:
GR86oldboy said:
turbobloke said:
Another climate politics related forecast bites the dust. Technically the call is due on Saturday 30 Nov when the hurricane season ends, but there's hardly enough time left for tax gas on holiday to whip up another 15 named storms.
Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
Selective data as usual, whereas the Met Office (predicted 22) and the National Hurricane Centre (predicted 17-25), pretty much in line with what has happened. Prediction 33
Actual 18
Click
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
In this thread on Thursday 22 August at 1015hrs I said:
we need to wait 'til 30 November and the end of the season (...) so far, so bad for the prediction (season started 01 June).
My thoughts clearly were that it was b
ks as usual - so far, so bad says it all.turbobloke said:
Having seen one prediction there was no selection at all.
17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
What 'good' reasons are they then? Looks like you see some conspiratorial political advantage to making a too high prediction17-25 is, as usual, a coin with multiple faces, 21 is too high and 22 is too high while "pretty much in line" is as vague as it needs to be. Predictions update: all seen so far were too high, for 'good' reasons.
Michael Mann's group record of atlantic hurricane season predictions back to 2008 isn't exactly brilliant but no sign of a too-high bias - 7 were too high and 9 too low and 1 spot on:
https://web.sas.upenn.edu/mannresearchgroup/highli...
mike9009 said:
How wonderfully irrelevant. Please can you colour in the graph and show the years where humans have existed on the planet.
A carbon dioxide theory should explain all observations over various timescales, not those you or anyone else cherry picks to include or exclude, and as robinessex pointed out, CO2 can't do the job. To do the job, reject the already discredited CO2 dominance idea, as many and increasing numbers of peer-reviewed papers have done particularly 2018-2024. Back to the graphical presentation of historical data as posted by robinessex. Cannell (2024) dismissed the claimed primacy of carbon dioxide levels, which cannot explain periods where the planet entered an ice age with high and rising CO2 levels, nor times when there were high CO2 levels but with oceans not acidifying.
Previously dismissed pressure changes can and do provide a satisfactory explanation for both, while also pointing out corresponding errors in climate modelling relating to nitrogen levels...in more detail:
-atmospheric pressure has varied more in the geological past than previously thought, with pressure variation linked to temperature which is not driven by CO2 levels
-climate models assume a constant mass of atmospheric nitrogen even though there is no basis in evidence for this
-changes in pressure can explain past hot-house and ice-house episodes which ran contrary to carbon dioxide levels
-e.g. high and rising CO2 going into and through an ice age *see graphic ^) and periods of high atmospheric CO2 with non-acidic oceans
-this gives a more accurate and complete picture, where CO2 is not the controlling factor for planetary temperature...
-in addition to atmospheric CO2 levels not being the determinant of global temperature, nor is it the determinant of ocean pH
Nelson and Nelson (2024) in "Decoupling CO2 from Climate Change" added to the now significant number of papers demonstrating the inability of carbon dioxide to have any significant let alone dangerous effect on temperature. Our political policy is years out of date, but that's inertia in cult politics for you.
Links given already in this thread.
Talking of the predicting of future weather events.
Mystic Met and the Beeb gearing up for Armageddon
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn8g3rm51m1o
Edited by dickymint on Thursday 28th November 17:24
mike9009 said:
How wonderfully irrelevant. Please can you colour in the graph and show the years where humans have existed on the planet.
Why humans? Any animal will do. Dinasors inhabited Earth for 165,000,00 years when the CO2 level was between 4000-6000 ppm. Why do we have a problem now with CO2 circa 400 ppm?turbobloke said:
robinessex said:
mike9009 said:
How wonderfully irrelevant. Please can you colour in the graph and show the years where humans have existed on the planet.
A carbon dioxide theory should explain all observations over various timescales, not those you or anyone else cherry picks to include or exclude, and as robinessex pointed out, CO2 can't do the job. To do the job, reject the already discredited CO2 dominance idea, as many and increasing numbers of peer-reviewed papers have done particularly 2018-2024. Back to the graphical presentation of historical data as posted by robinessex.
Although robinessex posts that graph every few months, he doesn't actually know anything about it. He clearly has no interest finding out where it's from or what it shows, so I guess he just did a google image search and found a picture he mistakenly thought told him the story he wanted to believe.
It's actually based on research by Prof Christopher Scotese and he studies historic climatic conditions. He's got a YouTube channel where he talks about that stuff.
Obviously a man very well placed to understand modern climate in the context of Earth's history.
And while robinessex and turbobloke want you to believe their made-up interpretation of the graph, the bloke who actually studies the field, did the work, published the research and made the graph, says otherwise:
Here are his thoughts on climate change:
Prof Scotese said:
...if Nature has its way, the Earth will slip back again into the grips of another major Ice Age and frigid landscapes will once again expand outward from the poles. But Nature may not have its way. Things have changed. We have changed things. The addition of CO2 to the atmosphere during the last 200 years of human industry has amplified this natural warming trend and the average global temperature has risen rapidly.
... This rate of warming is 50 times faster than what occurred during the previous 21,000 years.
Source... This rate of warming is 50 times faster than what occurred during the previous 21,000 years.
I've presented this to robinessex previously and inevitably he simply ignored it. He ignore it again, so you can expect to see him posting it again in a couple of months.
Edited by durbster on Friday 29th November 11:53
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff