forget global warming

[DrFilth]

global weirding is on its way
.
.

http://www.guardian.c...ooding-droughts-fires
.
.


weirding makes more sense

[New Judge]

[Two Part Answer]

I agree that there is evidence to support both sides, AP. But it is not incontrovertible evidence and a huge amount of the findings are based on highly speculative assumptions.

The difficulty I have is that evidence of man-made global warming (MMGW) is now presented as absolute fact. Children at primary school are being presented with these “facts” which they naturally accept without question and adults are expected to do likewise. Personally I’m not stating anything as fact. As you rightly say, it’s only my opinion. I’m open to persuasion but have thus far not been convinced.

I’m sorry if you find the term “heretics” inappropriate but that’s how people who do not believe in MMGW are now viewed – as pariahs, non-believers. It’s not the support of MMGW I describe as folly. It’s the ridiculous reaction to the allegation that has occurred in the UK. “Change your lightbulbs, cover the country with useless wind turbines, don’t use so many plastic bags, don’t let the cows fart too much, don’t drive your car, better still buy an electric car (which shifts the pollution from one place to another), don’t travel by aircraft” and so it goes on. All this might or might not reduce the UK’s emissions by 50% (though it won’t if shopkeepers continue to heat the street) and if it does that will knock global emissions down by 1% - sorted then (provided China stops building power stations).

[New Judge]

[Part Two]

I’m afraid I take offence at your suggestion that I’m dictating anything. I’m doing nothing of the sort, wouldn’t dream of it. All I’m asking is for a bit of common sense to prevail and for the government to stop ripping off the electorate by getting them to fund useless projects which are ostensibly designed to influence things over which we have no control.

Personally I’ve given up being polite when confronted by Climate Change fanatics. They do not see the matter as one of opinion open to debate but one of fact against which there must be no dissent. It wouldn’t bother me if it such an attitude didn’t affect me. But it does and it’s getting on my nerves.

[Slapshot]

Oh dear, wish I hadn't come in here....... Okay lets see, I'm a heretic, I'm also a scientist sitting at his desk in a well known weather services providers office...... ;-)
Answer the following:
What prompts governments to invest in IPCC and AGW research?
Why would there be a massive government cover up of missing emails from a AGW research unit?
Why would that research unit stop grants to researchwers who were finding data to countermand their finding and fly in the face of the IPCC?
Why does no-one ever talk about the MOST abundant Greehouse Gas as a problem?
Why do governments and IPCC slam opposing research?
Why did the architects of AGW dismiss over 70% of the base data they used to model AGW when it didn't fit the results........
Why do IPCC never tell you that if we didn't climate change we'd forever exist at a temperature around 12°C lower than we live at now??

Answers on a postcard

[jake-the-peg]

Exactly what sort of a scientist are you slapshot?

I'm surprised because you ask why does no one ever talk of the most abundant Greenhouse gas as a problem?

The most abundant Greenhouse gas is water vapour (as I'm sure you know)

When water vapour concentrations get too high there's a very simple controlling mechanism that isn't there for CO2 or Methane

It's called rain

Most Scientists I know are aware of that

Can't fit the answers to all the others on a postcard

[Davethedog]

The evidence for man made contributions to global warming is entirely theoretical. Although data has been presented as fact by the pro lobby every attempt at proving thier theorys conclusivly has come up short. This isn't my opinion a little reading on the internet will show this as fact.

There is much hand ringing by the greens that something must be done now and for this we are paying through the nose £2 for a chuffin light bulb??

http://www.theaustral...n59niix-1225938436693

[starone]

I'm not going to worry, mainly because I shall be dead before it happens. As I suspect most of us will be.

[Old_Geezer]

No worries, looks like the non-believers have a reprieve; won't need to say, "Whoops" for ages yet. Will probably be long gone by then.

http://cosmiclog.msnb...-hints-at-a-big-chill

Ah light bulbs and other nonsense. I'm unsure who gains by these draconian laws imposed on us, certainly not the planet, nor the people that's for sure, but someone surely must, and any excuse to push folk around is fair game eh ?

[DrFilth]

don't like these new bulbs

[jake-the-peg]

I think, Dave if you're forced into citing an 87 year old physicist to back your case you must be getting desperate.

I would be interested to know why sceptics think the climate is changing - If you don't think it is then there's no point in talking because there's a mountain of evidence from satellites down to show it is.

The sun's output is much the same - slightly declining if anything since the 80s,
(The higher Stratosphere is cooling slightly whilst the lower Troposhere is warming)

Volcanic activity is not much different and stands at about 1% of Fossil fuel contribution:
http://hvo.wr.usgs.go...ch/2007/07_02_15.html

Cosmic ray effects are 100 times too small to explain observations
http://adsabs.harvard...s/2009GeoRL..3609820P

So if it's not coming from humans I'd be interested to hear your theories in where you do think it's coming from

[New Judge]

Jake, where have you been ????

I’m not going to get too bogged down in this because I’ve got to go and wash my hair. But I understood (and believe it is widely accepted) that man is responsible for only 4% of greenhouse gases, with the rest coming from volcanic activity, reactions in the sea and animals farting.

Obviously a small change in that 96% will be far greater (in absolute terms) that a large change in the 4%.

[jake-the-peg]

Birdie you're right - past variations in the suns output have warmed the Earth.

This time is different

This time the sun is not warming

Do you really think that all the scientific reseach would have missed the obvious possibility that the sun was causing the effect?

As for the conspiracy theory, any scientific institute that could show that you're right would immediately generate huge kudos, fame and wealth for itself.

The incentive in Science is always to show someone else is wrong.

What would it take to convince you you are wrong?

If there's nothing that would convince you then it's simply a matter of faith not science.

Find me two or three major scientific institutes that think it's wrong and I'll reconsider my position.

What will it take to make you reconsider yours?

[New Judge]

Unfortunately, birdie, your efforts will be in vain.

Supporters of Man-Made Climate Change (MMCC) will tolerate no arguments against their cause. Their stock answer is that there is (apparently) no other explanation for climate change so it must be down to man. All other possible explanations are dismissed out of hand.

I’ve given up with logical argument. I’ve accepted that the supporters of MMCC cannot be persuaded that there is any other cause. What I’ve turned my attention to now is the ludicrous plans that governments have to combat the evil and to point out the similarity between their attitude and that of King Knud’s lackeys.

[237SJ]

A captain friend of mine who flies Boeing 777 says that in the last few years he has seen the coldest temperatures at altitude that he`s ever seen in 34 years of flying. The B777 flies higher than a lot of aircraft (40000 is fairly usual). He`s seen such low (-70 c ) temps that he`s had to go to a lower altitude to stop the fuel thickening and turning to gloop. How does that equate with global warming?