Natural changes in the Earth's climate
Discussion
Some interesting stuff just published looking at European temperatures over the last couple of millennia.
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
Lotus 50 said:
Some interesting stuff just published looking at European temperatures over the last couple of millennia.
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
land based instrument temps, fiddled to fhttp://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
k n back again. Try that graph with the satellite data - oops, no warming.Lotus 50 said:
Some interesting stuff just published looking at European temperatures over the last couple of millennia.
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
Ah, yes, we're well overdue for another worse than previously thought. Thought they'd abandoned that ploy.http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-932...
Suggests that the variability of summer temperatures over that time was bigger than previously thought and that the current 30 years are the warmest...
mybrainhurts said:
Ah, yes, we're well overdue for another worse than previously thought. Thought they'd abandoned that ploy.
So my cynical friend you do not like Graphs or science publications my guess is you use seaweed to predict both the weather and climate change. I think if you provided a critical view on what approach you take and the supporting evidence the comments may be taken more seriously...............then again its a piston heads so Opinions count for more than any Science publication 
mondeoman said:
land based instrument temps, fiddled to fk n back again. Try that graph with the satellite data - oops, no warming.
Err no, mostly proxy records. And some of the satellite data does indeed show a warming (although you wouldn't necessarily expect warming in the upper atmosphere)- have a closer read of the paper/webpage you referenced the other day.k n back again. Try that graph with the satellite data - oops, no warming.mybrainhurts said:
Ah, yes, we're well overdue for another worse than previously thought. Thought they'd abandoned that ploy.
That wasn't the point I was making, given the topic of the thread, what I was getting at is that there is lots of short-term variability in climate that happens naturally (both up and down) that are superimposed on any greenhouse gas effects. 
Toaster said:
mybrainhurts said:
Ah, yes, we're well overdue for another worse than previously thought. Thought they'd abandoned that ploy.
So my cynical friend you do not like Graphs or science publications my guess is you use seaweed to predict both the weather and climate change. I think if you provided a critical view on what approach you take and the supporting evidence the comments may be taken more seriously...............then again its a piston heads so Opinions count for more than any Science publication Lotus 50 said:
mybrainhurts said:
Ah, yes, we're well overdue for another worse than previously thought. Thought they'd abandoned that ploy.
That wasn't the point I was making, given the topic of the thread, what I was getting at is that there is lots of short-term variability in climate that happens naturally (both up and down) that are superimposed on any greenhouse gas effects. There have been periods with much higher Co2 in the atmosphere than now in the past with no runaway greenhouse, and in fact, a lot of glaciation, but typically the Sun's output is weaker in the past.
Regardless of what we do, the sun will eventually destroy the Earth's ecosystem. Firstly, by gradually increasing it's output, and thus raising the temperatures until very uncomfortable for life to exist, then impossible. Eventually it will expand in size and consume the Earth.
Doomed. We're all doomed, even the planet, so don't spend too much time worrying about it.
Regardless of what we do, the sun will eventually destroy the Earth's ecosystem. Firstly, by gradually increasing it's output, and thus raising the temperatures until very uncomfortable for life to exist, then impossible. Eventually it will expand in size and consume the Earth.
Doomed. We're all doomed, even the planet, so don't spend too much time worrying about it.
mybrainhurts said:
When I see the corruption within climate research, I find it impossible to identify anything that might be true or correct. The science is settled. It is fraudulent. As a consequence, trying to assess it is a pointless endeavour.
What Fraudulent Science is this then?Lotus 50 said:
JoeMarano said:
The world is unpredictable. st happens. st changes. I'm on earth for a hundred years max after that I really couldn't give two sts what happens as i'll be dead.
So why bother commenting?t happens. st changes. I'm on earth for a hundred years max after that I really couldn't give two sts what happens as i'll be dead.Toaster said:
mybrainhurts said:
When I see the corruption within climate research, I find it impossible to identify anything that might be true or correct. The science is settled. It is fraudulent. As a consequence, trying to assess it is a pointless endeavour.
What Fraudulent Science is this then?Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff