Body & Soul1 min ago
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Two points spring to mind:
1) He doesn't actually present any evidence
2) He claims that scientists who say that climate change exists and is man-made are in it for the money and supported by governments and big business who can benefit from it. He forgets to mention that what he's actually doing is selling weather forecasts (he's in it for the money), and that the most vociferous "anti-climate-change" arguments tend to come from organisations which are supported and financed, either directly, or at one or more remove, by big business (BP, Shell, et al).
1) He doesn't actually present any evidence
2) He claims that scientists who say that climate change exists and is man-made are in it for the money and supported by governments and big business who can benefit from it. He forgets to mention that what he's actually doing is selling weather forecasts (he's in it for the money), and that the most vociferous "anti-climate-change" arguments tend to come from organisations which are supported and financed, either directly, or at one or more remove, by big business (BP, Shell, et al).
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Impossible to tell. I cannot find any predition of the Russian heatwave issued by weatheraction.com BEFORE the event occured (he boasts about predicting it on the video).
He sells forecasts as a business, so he is unlikely to publicise them for free. Which is a problem, because when an extreme weather event occurs and he claims to have predicted it, we only have his word for that.
He sells forecasts as a business, so he is unlikely to publicise them for free. Which is a problem, because when an extreme weather event occurs and he claims to have predicted it, we only have his word for that.
"but is he accurate?"
Well according to Wikipedia,he not only refuses to publish details of his methodology, but his predictions for January 2008 (-17 deg in the Midlands, and average temps around freezing) were wildly wrong: "The final CET for January 2008 ended up over 3degC above the standard reference average making the predictions for a cold Jan very poor. In fact it ended up being one of the warmest Januaries since records began."
What's more (also according to Wikipedia), he tends to ban reporters who are critical of his work, from quoting him.
His behaviour seems more like that of inventors of "perpetual motion" machines than that of a scientist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn
Well according to Wikipedia,he not only refuses to publish details of his methodology, but his predictions for January 2008 (-17 deg in the Midlands, and average temps around freezing) were wildly wrong: "The final CET for January 2008 ended up over 3degC above the standard reference average making the predictions for a cold Jan very poor. In fact it ended up being one of the warmest Januaries since records began."
What's more (also according to Wikipedia), he tends to ban reporters who are critical of his work, from quoting him.
His behaviour seems more like that of inventors of "perpetual motion" machines than that of a scientist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Corbyn
It never fails to amaze me how selective skeptics are with their evidence.
Birdie goes on about urban heat islands skewing the climate data.
This is despite the warming being confirmed by satellite observations which obviously are not affected by this.
It is incredible that so many people - especially in this country seem so determined to reject the views of experts that they simply don't *want* to believe.
They can't reconsile this and end up in the ridiculous position that there must be an international conspiracy of the world's top scientists to lie to the entire world in order to gain extra funding.
You'd need a smaller group of conspirators to fake the moon landings
Birdie goes on about urban heat islands skewing the climate data.
This is despite the warming being confirmed by satellite observations which obviously are not affected by this.
It is incredible that so many people - especially in this country seem so determined to reject the views of experts that they simply don't *want* to believe.
They can't reconsile this and end up in the ridiculous position that there must be an international conspiracy of the world's top scientists to lie to the entire world in order to gain extra funding.
You'd need a smaller group of conspirators to fake the moon landings
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I tend to feel the that the problem with natural climate change wherein people aren't responsible and it's cyclical etc for scientists is that there has to be a mechanism, a process.
In science things don't just happen, they don't just occur, as if by magic (because that whiffs a little bit like religion to them), so the scientist will ask if climate change is a natural phenoma, what is the catalyst?
Personally I don't know, I find the advocates on both sides tend to offer equally compelling arguments, well not entirely true, I saw a debate a few months ago were the climate change believers got absolutely annihilated.
In science things don't just happen, they don't just occur, as if by magic (because that whiffs a little bit like religion to them), so the scientist will ask if climate change is a natural phenoma, what is the catalyst?
Personally I don't know, I find the advocates on both sides tend to offer equally compelling arguments, well not entirely true, I saw a debate a few months ago were the climate change believers got absolutely annihilated.
nearly 40 years since i first heard of "man made climate change", and still no convincing proof...... both sides of the argument seem to be able to get so called"top Experts" who i have never heard of, to argue their side, but am pretty convinced that if it is man made, then after 40 years you would think they could produce the evidence . The earth is heating up and wither man was here or not it would still be heating up.... then cooling down as it has done several times before and most likely will again and again....................
-- answer removed --
1 to 17 of 17
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.