Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 7)
Discussion
Kawasicki said:
There are plenty of multi-decade temp increases and decreases many times higher than what we are experiencing now in the ice core records, that are not occurring in DO events.
Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Absolutely. Looking at the data is the best way to avoid what's happened with those groupthinkers in El stovey's post yesterday who've done what Dr Moore (Greenpeace co-founder and former leader now being erased from their webspace) described as happening in the 80s and 90s to the organisation he helped to create...science and logic abandoned to embrace political activism and the logical fallacy fest of trying to shoot any messengers...messengers who disagree based on credible empirical evidence rather than ideology.Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Kawasicki said:
There are plenty of multi-decade temp increases and decreases many times higher than what we are experiencing now in the ice core records, that are not occurring in DO events.
Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
"Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now"Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Now = global warming
Even if you can only compare apples to oranges you can still make precedence claims about apples? No
turbobloke said:
Kawasicki said:
There are plenty of multi-decade temp increases and decreases many times higher than what we are experiencing now in the ice core records, that are not occurring in DO events.
Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Absolutely. Looking at the data is the best way to avoid what's happened with those groupthinkers in El stovey's post yesterday who've done what Dr Moore (Greenpeace co-founder and former leader now being erased from their webspace) described as happening in the 80s and 90s to the organisation he helped to create...science and logic abandoned to embrace political activism and the logical fallacy fest of trying to shoot any messengers...messengers who disagree based on credible empirical evidence rather than ideology.Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
kerplunk said:
Kawasicki said:
There are plenty of multi-decade temp increases and decreases many times higher than what we are experiencing now in the ice core records, that are not occurring in DO events.
Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
"Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now"Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Now = global warming
Even if you can only compare apples to oranges you can still make precedence claims about apples? No
All we have is regional data, and the regional swings we see now are nothing special (bland even) compared to what the proxy records have indicated may have happened in the past.
Trapping heat in an open system, ho ho ho.
Switch off the Sun and the gaseous atmosphere gets warmer and stays warm forever due to heat trapping by the tiny fraction of carbon dioxide in it (or indeed anything else in it) just as the rest of the planet freezes to the temperature of nearby space...absolutely not going to happen. Heat is not being trapped, it's escaping, that's an open system for you, and real world data shows the heat escaping faster than models allow (for), naughty heat.
Current natural pedestrian warming is not unprecedented in extent, not at all rapid in comparison to other natural events in the past, and not dangerous, but truly believe inadequate models then panic and pay more tax anyway, otherwise juvenile groupthinkers in various organisations will call you names...and some PHers will think that proves something. Our climate-energy policy is working so well after all, we should bend the knee to the new religion.
Switch off the Sun and the gaseous atmosphere gets warmer and stays warm forever due to heat trapping by the tiny fraction of carbon dioxide in it (or indeed anything else in it) just as the rest of the planet freezes to the temperature of nearby space...absolutely not going to happen. Heat is not being trapped, it's escaping, that's an open system for you, and real world data shows the heat escaping faster than models allow (for), naughty heat.
Current natural pedestrian warming is not unprecedented in extent, not at all rapid in comparison to other natural events in the past, and not dangerous, but truly believe inadequate models then panic and pay more tax anyway, otherwise juvenile groupthinkers in various organisations will call you names...and some PHers will think that proves something. Our climate-energy policy is working so well after all, we should bend the knee to the new religion.
Kawasicki said:
kerplunk said:
Kawasicki said:
There are plenty of multi-decade temp increases and decreases many times higher than what we are experiencing now in the ice core records, that are not occurring in DO events.
Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
"Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now"Are they synchronized between Greenland and the Antarctic? Who knows? Maybe, maybe not.
Look at the raw data yourselves. Even if you can only compare regionally, nothing special is happening now.
Now = global warming
Even if you can only compare apples to oranges you can still make precedence claims about apples? No
All we have is regional data, and the regional swings we see now are nothing special (bland even) compared to what the proxy records have indicated may have happened in the past.
This would be better addressed to the great empirical data-adherant putting forward precedence claims.
El stovey said:
robinessex said:
The ABD campaigns for:
More investment in roads
Lower road taxes
No road pricing or tolls
Reduced traffic congestion
Evidence-based road safety
Improved parking provision
ABD Campaign
A summary of the key issues for drivers:
Our objective is to provide an active, responsible voice to lobby on behalf of Britain’s drivers. We believe that official policies in recent years, both from the national Government and from local authorities have discriminated against drivers by means of misleading information, obstruction, restriction, delay and taxation.
It looks as if a few here are in the wrong place, PistonHeads isn't for you. Have you tried Mums Net ?
If this sounds reasonable to you then crack on with it. More investment in roads
Lower road taxes
No road pricing or tolls
Reduced traffic congestion
Evidence-based road safety
Improved parking provision
ABD Campaign
A summary of the key issues for drivers:
Our objective is to provide an active, responsible voice to lobby on behalf of Britain’s drivers. We believe that official policies in recent years, both from the national Government and from local authorities have discriminated against drivers by means of misleading information, obstruction, restriction, delay and taxation.
It looks as if a few here are in the wrong place, PistonHeads isn't for you. Have you tried Mums Net ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_of_British_...
About the ABD
Working for you, the motorist
The Alliance of British Drivers is a not-for-profit organisation that is owned and controlled by its members. We are independent and simply represent the views of our members who are representative of the mass of road users in the UK. Anyone can join the ABD so as to help to support our aims.
We promote your views to national and local Government bodies, and provide information to our members and the general public. We try to counter the misinformation spread by many people on the use of private vehicles, and we promote freedom of choice about how you travel.
The ABD is also represented on the Road User Panel of Transport Focus — the independent transport user watchdog.
The end, we're wandering off the subject
With the recent demonstration in a peer-reviewed paper that a key 1999 attribution paper ascribing climate events to human emissions is based on erroneous use of statistics - when a standard remedy was applied, the greenhouse signal disappeared - it's timely to note a new report on UK weather demonstrating using official weather records that UK weather is not becoming more extreme.
When the paper addressing major shortcomings in the 1999 paper was pre-publication, and in keeping with good publication practice, copies were sent to the authors of the 1999 paper.which was being severely criticised. The paper (from McKitrick) then went forward to publication following formal peer review. In similar fashion the report on UK weather (from Homewood) was sent to the Royal Society and UK Met Office for review, with their comments to be added as addenda to the report, but no reply was received from either organisation; the report was therefore published by the the cross-party GWPF - chaired by Labour peer Lord Donoughue - without them.
The solution pdf file
When the paper addressing major shortcomings in the 1999 paper was pre-publication, and in keeping with good publication practice, copies were sent to the authors of the 1999 paper.which was being severely criticised. The paper (from McKitrick) then went forward to publication following formal peer review. In similar fashion the report on UK weather (from Homewood) was sent to the Royal Society and UK Met Office for review, with their comments to be added as addenda to the report, but no reply was received from either organisation; the report was therefore published by the the cross-party GWPF - chaired by Labour peer Lord Donoughue - without them.
Oppenheimer said:
We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy, error undetected will flourish and subvert.
The report addresses baseless hype that UK weather is becoming more extreme, a constant background noise within the current fear-mongering narrative of agw and one used by activists and politicians to scare the public while pressing ahead with damaging political policy based on climate models rather than credible empirical data.Homewood said:
The UK's weather is becoming, if anything, less extreme. We are still waiting for evidence of a 'climate crisis' that politicians and environmentalists claim is upon us. But observational data shows that in the UK there is no evidence for any worsening weather trends.
Storms are not an increasing problem either, with extreme winds having been on the decline for 30 years.
The problem web linkStorms are not an increasing problem either, with extreme winds having been on the decline for 30 years.
The solution pdf file
turbobloke said:
...what Dr Moore (Greenpeace co-founder and former leader now being erased from their webspace) ...
Ah recycling the Dr Moore material again. Because it's crucial that we hear (for the nth time) a decades old opinion from of one of the great minds...
turbobloke said:
the old drivel is just reheated/recycled ...
Edited by durbster on Wednesday 18th May 07:44
durbster said:
turbobloke said:
...what Dr Moore (Greenpeace co-founder and former leader now being erased from their webspace) ...
Ah recycling the Dr Moore material again. Because it's crucial that we hear (for the nth time) a decades old opinion from of one of the great minds...
turbobloke said:
the old drivel is just reheated/recycled ...
Can't recall posting that stuff, I can recall posting comments from Dr Moore given how pertinent they are. How's your memory? It can't be that good judging by the rehashing and reheating of same-old personal angle dreck, the ever-ready attrition loop of pro-agw activism when a lack of evidence hits home.
Not having posted these particular quotes before, though he's said similar things several times, this will doubtless meet with widespread approval, especially as it's not "decades old" it's from 2021
Heading Climate ‘Scare Story’ Began With Far-Left Ideology
Dr P Moore said:
The ultra-leftists took over my organization when they realised there was a lot of money and power to be had there.
He notes that Greenpeace, along with the rest of the environmental movement, drifted into a belief that sees the “human species as the enemy of nature, the enemy of the Earth”.Moore has said the push for Net Zero carbon emissions by governments around the world is “purely a political slogan.”
Dr Moore said:
This (Net Zero) is an unattainable political goal for society. And I also believe it is a goal that will bring greater hardship than people have endured since the great wars, since the great disease epidemics of the past.
It's not as if climate-energy policy appeasing the ultra-leftist campaigners is causing problems already, just look around, it's all good. Imagine if a government hosting a global climate conference had to order coal burning to keep the lights on because of ideological attachment to expensive No wonder a mention of Moore embracing reality touches nerves with agw supporters, reality has no sell-by date. It can and often does lead to the pro-agw Old Faithful, shoot-the-messenger personal attacks...Wonderful!
Dr Moore said:
There’s so much propaganda and so many lies, but the unified theory of scare stories is what I call these
https://www.theepochtimes.com/climate-scare-story-began-with-far-left-ideology-greenpeace-co-founder_3916103.htmlPoor turbobloke. Hasn't had anything new to post since 2015 so has to keep recycling the old material over and over.
You can't even accuse him of flogging a dead horse this time. This one must have finished decomposing about five years ago.
You can't even accuse him of flogging a dead horse this time. This one must have finished decomposing about five years ago.
turbobloke said:
the old drivel is just reheated/recycled ...
Couldn't have put it better myself.Poor? Poor show from agw ramping, with repeated ad homs accompanying nothing. Where's the analysis of official weather records showing that extreme weather in the UK is increasing as claimed by activists and politicians? Nowhere, it's decreased over the last 30 years. Where's an explanation of how dominant carbon dioxide was dominated in 2021 with 2021 being cooler than 2020? Nowhere, for obvious reasons. Where's the valid stats attributing climate events to human emissions? Where's the analysis showing efficacy of UK climate policy with no need for politicians to order coal burning in the middle of a climate conference and no need for vulnerable voters to choose between heating and eating? Questions too difficult? Rhetorical question.
voyds9 said:
We've now had 60 years of doom and gloom predicitions
So why aren't we all under water, whilst baking in desert conditions, whilst being swept away with tornadoes and snowed in by the snow that children won't see ever again
What I fear we actually have is scientists saying they were extreme predictions that haven't through their mitigation come to pass.
But their new models say we must do even more and faster or it will be worse than ever.
Sorry I'm not buying it. I would quite like an extra 2C in the UK
‘We are living in hell’: Pakistan and India suffer extreme spring heatwavesSo why aren't we all under water, whilst baking in desert conditions, whilst being swept away with tornadoes and snowed in by the snow that children won't see ever again
What I fear we actually have is scientists saying they were extreme predictions that haven't through their mitigation come to pass.
But their new models say we must do even more and faster or it will be worse than ever.
Sorry I'm not buying it. I would quite like an extra 2C in the UK
Countdown said:
voyds9 said:
We've now had 60 years of doom and gloom predicitions
So why aren't we all under water, whilst baking in desert conditions, whilst being swept away with tornadoes and snowed in by the snow that children won't see ever again
What I fear we actually have is scientists saying they were extreme predictions that haven't through their mitigation come to pass.
But their new models say we must do even more and faster or it will be worse than ever.
Sorry I'm not buying it. I would quite like an extra 2C in the UK
‘We are living in hell’: Pakistan and India suffer extreme spring heatwavesSo why aren't we all under water, whilst baking in desert conditions, whilst being swept away with tornadoes and snowed in by the snow that children won't see ever again
What I fear we actually have is scientists saying they were extreme predictions that haven't through their mitigation come to pass.
But their new models say we must do even more and faster or it will be worse than ever.
Sorry I'm not buying it. I would quite like an extra 2C in the UK
A high temperature needs causality to be unambiguously attributed to humans and the 1999 attribution paper has just had its stats taken apart.
Turbat 54 deg in May 2017, Mohenjo Daro 54 deg C in May 2010. This causes problems of course but no unambiguous attribution to humans is available, only opinion e.g. The Guardian.
Globally extreme cold weather kills more humans than extreme heat. Then again if humans are the enemy...
Turbat 54 deg in May 2017, Mohenjo Daro 54 deg C in May 2010. This causes problems of course but no unambiguous attribution to humans is available, only opinion e.g. The Guardian.
Globally extreme cold weather kills more humans than extreme heat. Then again if humans are the enemy...
Link with my emphasis said:
Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to an international study analysing over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries.
"It's often assumed that extreme weather causes the majority of deaths, with most previous research focusing on the effects of extreme heat waves," says lead author Dr Antonio Gasparrini from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine in the UK. "Our findings, from an analysis of the largest dataset of temperature-related deaths ever collected, show that the majority of these deaths actually happen on moderately hot and cold days, with most deaths caused by moderately cold temperatures."
Cold was responsible for the majority of these deaths (7.29% of all deaths), while just 0.42% of all (temperature related) deaths were attributable to heat.
The study also found that extreme temperatures were responsible for less than 1% of all deaths
A double whammy for pro-agw alarmists. By memory from the paper, the headline is taking x17 and rounding it up to x20. Yes I've referenced this peer-reviewed paper before, but agw supporters keep missing it or forgetting it; this news item may be more memorable."It's often assumed that extreme weather causes the majority of deaths, with most previous research focusing on the effects of extreme heat waves," says lead author Dr Antonio Gasparrini from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine in the UK. "Our findings, from an analysis of the largest dataset of temperature-related deaths ever collected, show that the majority of these deaths actually happen on moderately hot and cold days, with most deaths caused by moderately cold temperatures."
Cold was responsible for the majority of these deaths (7.29% of all deaths), while just 0.42% of all (temperature related) deaths were attributable to heat.
The study also found that extreme temperatures were responsible for less than 1% of all deaths
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/627630
There are now scientifically developed crops e.g. rice, maize, wheat, sugar cane with seeds that germinate and plants that grow in (naturally occurring) hot droughts. India has seen a trial already, 2020 iirc. Are tolerant Green activists in favour of feeding 'nasty humans'?
turbobloke said:
With the recent demonstration in a peer-reviewed paper that a key 1999 attribution paper ascribing climate events to human emissions is based on erroneous use of statistics - when a standard remedy was applied, the greenhouse signal disappeared - it's timely to note a new report on UK weather demonstrating using official weather records that UK weather is not becoming more extreme.
When the paper addressing major shortcomings in the 1999 paper was pre-publication, and in keeping with good publication practice, copies were sent to the authors of the 1999 paper.which was being severely criticised. The paper (from McKitrick) then went forward to publication following formal peer review. In similar fashion the report on UK weather (from Homewood) was sent to the Royal Society and UK Met Office for review, with their comments to be added as addenda to the report, but no reply was received from either organisation; the report was therefore published by the the cross-party GWPF - chaired by Labour peer Lord Donoughue - without them.
The solution pdf file
It's like a 'lite' version of the far more detailed annual UK State of the Climate reports released by UKMO.When the paper addressing major shortcomings in the 1999 paper was pre-publication, and in keeping with good publication practice, copies were sent to the authors of the 1999 paper.which was being severely criticised. The paper (from McKitrick) then went forward to publication following formal peer review. In similar fashion the report on UK weather (from Homewood) was sent to the Royal Society and UK Met Office for review, with their comments to be added as addenda to the report, but no reply was received from either organisation; the report was therefore published by the the cross-party GWPF - chaired by Labour peer Lord Donoughue - without them.
Oppenheimer said:
We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy, error undetected will flourish and subvert.
The report addresses baseless hype that UK weather is becoming more extreme, a constant background noise within the current fear-mongering narrative of agw and one used by activists and politicians to scare the public while pressing ahead with damaging political policy based on climate models rather than credible empirical data.Homewood said:
The UK's weather is becoming, if anything, less extreme. We are still waiting for evidence of a 'climate crisis' that politicians and environmentalists claim is upon us. But observational data shows that in the UK there is no evidence for any worsening weather trends.
Storms are not an increasing problem either, with extreme winds having been on the decline for 30 years.
The problem web linkStorms are not an increasing problem either, with extreme winds having been on the decline for 30 years.
The solution pdf file
https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/...
Dr Moore commenting on agw activism said:
There’s so much propaganda and so many lies.
Influencing policymakers via propaganda has given us our wonderfully effective climate-energy policies.
Media roles are coming under the spotlight.
Book Review by Dr David Whitehouse of Beyond the Hype by Fiona Fox said:
Fiona Fox’s fascinating book tells the chequered story of the first 20 years of the Science Media Centre's avowed campaign to change the culture of science communication. Many things it has done are to be commended, such as the opening up of government scientists, but it became too close to journalism, especially the BBC.
The BBC’s News guidelines prohibit it from becoming associated with pressure groups... The SMC is a pressure group but the BBC ignored this because who would not want better science in the media and who would not want Fiona Fox and her team to select suitable experts and collect quotes from them? For years the BBC’s Head of News, who claimed in 2005 that climate science was settled, was a SMC trustee. Today the BBC’s science editor is on its Advisory Committee as is a former BBC science correspondent. Its chair is a former senior BBC news executive.
The BBC’s News guidelines prohibit it from becoming associated with pressure groups... The SMC is a pressure group but the BBC ignored this because who would not want better science in the media and who would not want Fiona Fox and her team to select suitable experts and collect quotes from them? For years the BBC’s Head of News, who claimed in 2005 that climate science was settled, was a SMC trustee. Today the BBC’s science editor is on its Advisory Committee as is a former BBC science correspondent. Its chair is a former senior BBC news executive.
That's such a shock. Now we have headlines like this.
Headline and Content said:
The BBC's (false) prophet of doom: His wife supports Extinction Rebellion, his sister has been fined for protesting with Insulate Britain... No wonder insiders says their climate editor Justin Rowlatt is more 'campaigner' than reporter...Some at the BBC, it seems, are losing patience with their climate editor. 'The Justin Rowlatt stuff is grim,' an unnamed BBC source told one newspaper this week. 'These are not 'mistakes'; he's a campaigner.'
Mistakes plural, there's the extreme weather 'mistake' then before that turbine subsidy 'mistake' both requiring formal corrections.
Early this morning (3:30 am), there was some lunatic woman on the Beeb, ranting and blaming just about every weather event anywhere on the planet as 'being caused by CC'. A complete nutcase. The Beeb interviewer lapped it up. Beeb is now a 100% propaganda spreader. Facts don't matter, let's hype it up as dramatic news.
robinessex said:
Early this morning (3:30 am), there was some lunatic woman on the Beeb, ranting and blaming just about every weather event anywhere on the planet as 'being caused by CC'. A complete nutcase. The Beeb interviewer lapped it up. Beeb is now a 100% propaganda spreader. Facts don't matter, let's hype it up as dramatic news.
We are seeing the merging of the covid and climate hysteriae. Charles was linking more pandemics with climate change a couple of days ago, so expect more climate tipping points and more diseases of concern. Yay…Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff