Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 7)
Discussion
dickymint said:
List of these actual predictions please - shouldn't take you long to trawl through your filing cabinet - Durbs will give you a hand as "it's really easy to find this stuff. We can simply find a ........."
As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
It’s all been posted so many times.As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
TB must really love having you constantly defending him and demanding evidence that highlights all the times he got it wrong.
Don’t become a lawyer (as if) whatever you do.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 21st October 08:02
El stovey said:
dickymint said:
List of these actual predictions please - shouldn't take you long to trawl through your filing cabinet - Durbs will give you a hand as "it's really easy to find this stuff. We can simply find a ........."
As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
It’s all been posted so many times.As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
TB must really love having you constantly defending him and demanding evidence that highlights all the times he got it wrong.
Don’t become a lawyer (as if) whatever you do.
It's understandable that this latest transparently bogus diversion is needed right now, with papers from Landscheidt/Archibald/Abdusamatov being pronounced as ALL (caps) wrong, even though they relate to 2030-2050 and it's now 2021.
Attacking people is the way out, curiously this involves me sometimes, which is most flattering. Diversionary tactics can try to take attention away from the actual, numerous, embarrassing agw prediction failures, as well as the growing realisation that COP26 is already down the tubes, but it's futile. Nevertheless, as always, the COP will be pronounced a success in closing speeches and BBC coverage. Naturally there's more to be done at the next private jet carbonfest, not least because each COP is so successful.
More from the good news locker.
"COP26: US senator blocking Joe Biden's climate legislation poses threat to success of climate summit"
Sky News
It's as though the absence of Putin, Jinping and other leaderss (India, Saudi...), plus the lack of updated pledges on evil C666, means nothing. but the fails stacking up speak volumes.
Scott from Oz has been making apologies for absence noises but I suspect he'll attend. At least they've got Boris.
"COP26: US senator blocking Joe Biden's climate legislation poses threat to success of climate summit"
Sky News
It's as though the absence of Putin, Jinping and other leaderss (India, Saudi...), plus the lack of updated pledges on evil C666, means nothing. but the fails stacking up speak volumes.
Scott from Oz has been making apologies for absence noises but I suspect he'll attend. At least they've got Boris.
turbobloke said:
durbster said:
turbobloke said:
Awesome guff.
Nobody on here made predictions of global cooling, some have posted the predictions of cooling from Abdusamatov, Archibald and Landscheidt, when I've done so I've usually said that we must keep looking at the data to see what's happening, up to the point of sufficient repetition. Faith, true belief; they belong with agw.
You in 2007:Nobody on here made predictions of global cooling, some have posted the predictions of cooling from Abdusamatov, Archibald and Landscheidt, when I've done so I've usually said that we must keep looking at the data to see what's happening, up to the point of sufficient repetition. Faith, true belief; they belong with agw.
In the failed gotcha post where you quoted me, I clearly state that we must "wait for the 'experiment' to roll out in real time" i.e. wait for the data to arrive, which is clearly not in keeping with your, or El s's claim to a faith on cooling.
turbobloke said:
"Once we see"...so, we wait for the 'experiment' to proceed through 2030 to 2050.
Yeah yeah. You were saying the same thing back then too. In 2008 you said we would know which way things were going by 2020. We got to 2020, so have you accepted which way it's going?
turbobloke said:
El stovey said:
dickymint said:
List of these actual predictions please - shouldn't take you long to trawl through your filing cabinet - Durbs will give you a hand as "it's really easy to find this stuff. We can simply find a ........."
As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
It’s all been posted so many times.As an aside are they paying double time for flying in all the COP 26 celebs?
TB must really love having you constantly defending him and demanding evidence that highlights all the times he got it wrong.
Don’t become a lawyer (as if) whatever you do.
It's understandable that this latest transparently bogus diversion is needed right now, with papers from Landscheidt/Archibald/Abdusamatov being pronounced as ALL (caps) wrong, even though they relate to 2030-2050 and it's now 2021.
The internet never forgets.
It does seem ironic, that given the thread's title, the government have just skipped all the "debate" part, and gone straight to theannouncement part of these policy decisions.
Ok, I get they voted for net zero already. But at the council where I work, every decision report has to have a bit signing off the financial impact. It seems parliament were happy to vote through a "er, not sure: we'll get back to you" on this one.
I'm glad HMTreasury is refusing to let it be funded by borrowing.
Though I don't expect to see Gilet's jaune type movement in the UK when the impact actually hits, because generally we're less militant and I think the media will do the job to ostrasice them as rabble rousers.
Ok, I get they voted for net zero already. But at the council where I work, every decision report has to have a bit signing off the financial impact. It seems parliament were happy to vote through a "er, not sure: we'll get back to you" on this one.
I'm glad HMTreasury is refusing to let it be funded by borrowing.
Though I don't expect to see Gilet's jaune type movement in the UK when the impact actually hits, because generally we're less militant and I think the media will do the job to ostrasice them as rabble rousers.
turbobloke said:
El stovey said:
durbster said:
See previous post. Wrong again.
The internet never forgets.
All his old failed predictions are preserved and archived in Google so he can’t even delete them. The internet never forgets.
There does seem to be natural cycles at play. Predicting them to within 10 or 20 years is a bit more tricky
Would a natural cooling event in 2030 mean the abandonment of the green agenda? Or would it "prove" that the plan was working, so we should redouble our efforts? I think a £15k retrofitted GSHP heating system would be a tough sell under those conditions.....
(Are you taking advantage of the 5k grant?)
robinessex said:
I see, with COP26 on the horizon, that the Beeb misinformation/propaganda service (AKA the News) is busy pushing climate as a serious, getting worse every day, event that is the major priority and interest for everyone in the UK. I bet old Haribo and McGrath are raking it in.
Their website's weasel words on COP26 are amusing, they're trying very hard and deserve a Merit Mark from The Team for slavish devotion to The Cause.hairykrishna said:
Turbobloke, you spent years predicting a cooling trend starting in 2012. Even by your standards it takes some front to pretend you didn't. Anyone who has been on these threads over the years knows you did. How are the candles and Damart working out for you?
It’s astonishing (not really) reading him trying to deny it all now. kerplunk said:
For those interested here's what Landscheidt actually said in his 2003 "New Little Ice Age Instead Of Global Warming?" paper:
"Analysis of the sun's varying activity in the last two millennia indicates that contrary to the IPCC's speculation about man-made global warming as high as 5.8° C within the next hundred years, a long period of cool climate with its coldest phase around 2030 is to be expected"
and
"We need not wait until 2030 to see whether the forecast of the next deep Gleissberg minimum is correct. A declining trend in solar activity and global temperature should become manifest long before the deepest point in the development"
bringing up TB's usual link shortfall - http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/new-e.htm
Imagine if this were a forecast made by the IPCC in 2003 of *extremely* rapid warming to a peak in 2030 - enough to double the warming since the early 19th century - and then there was signicant cooling to 2020.
Hands up who buys it?
...but it's actually worse than that for old Landscheidt. His predictions of a new little ice age began in 1981 when his pattern-seeking 'science' said big cooling would begin in 1990 and for at least 3 decades after:"Analysis of the sun's varying activity in the last two millennia indicates that contrary to the IPCC's speculation about man-made global warming as high as 5.8° C within the next hundred years, a long period of cool climate with its coldest phase around 2030 is to be expected"
and
"We need not wait until 2030 to see whether the forecast of the next deep Gleissberg minimum is correct. A declining trend in solar activity and global temperature should become manifest long before the deepest point in the development"
bringing up TB's usual link shortfall - http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/new-e.htm
Imagine if this were a forecast made by the IPCC in 2003 of *extremely* rapid warming to a peak in 2030 - enough to double the warming since the early 19th century - and then there was signicant cooling to 2020.
Hands up who buys it?
http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/swinging.htm
Then in a 2000 update that reads like an apology for the fact cooling hadn't shown up and warming was observed instead, he assured us that cooling would now commence during the next 10 years:
http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/solarwind.htm
He didn't live to see it but the 2000s were warmer than the nineties of course.
Landscheidt didn't just restrict himself to the effects of solar cycles on earth's climate. He found correlations with an amazing array of things like the rise of dictators like Hitler and Stalin, wars, the number of 'battles', the US gross national product, whether people were creative types and what vocations people went into:
http://bourabai.kz/landscheidt/golden.htm
RIP nutty cyclo-maniac
Edited by kerplunk on Thursday 21st October 10:28
robinessex said:
kerplunk said:
RIP nutty cyclo-maniac
I presume that CC scientists have never made predictions that turned out to be complete b
ks then ?kerplunk said:
robinessex said:
kerplunk said:
RIP nutty cyclo-maniac
I presume that CC scientists have never made predictions that turned out to be complete bks then ?At least the lhe language is in keeping with agw and the outcome is equally poor.
Look up the papers from the three scientists being referred to, and note the dates involved, easy If you have access. As of 2021 the dates are in the future, 2030-2050, so cannot have failed, unlike the myriad of failed agw predictions you acknowledge ^.
turbobloke said:
kerplunk said:
robinessex said:
kerplunk said:
RIP nutty cyclo-maniac
I presume that CC scientists have never made predictions that turned out to be complete bks then ?At least the lhe language is in keeping with agw and the outcome is equally poor.
Look up the papers from the three scientists being referred to, and note the dates involved, easy If you have access. As of 2021 the dates are in the future, 2030-2050, so cannot have failed, unlike the myriad of failed agw predictions you acknowledge ^.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff