The great global warming scam, worth a listen I think.

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

Dave645 said:
I hope your right I have seen no convincing evidence either way, what will be will be. I always find actual measurements are more accurate than predictions. The only problem is for us the general public, even measurements seem to get multiple interpretations.
It makes it hard to come to conclusions that have, 100% surety.

I agree with you totally, brilliant post. All I want to know from any world wide temperature taking regime is that it's correct data and correctly done. The normal person can see for themselves then and not mistrust it.

dstudent · Jan 12, 2017

jendan said:
Its an open farming forum,and everyone can read and comment.If you dont want that then send PMs.Most of us come on here for leisure,with a cuppa to warm us up,and a bit of a rest from outside work.We dont take things too seriously.Stop digging yourself a hole."take the hint"

I have read a few of your posts where your tone was less than polite and actually quite rude including to me, for no reason whatsoever, so do not come and preach.

Secondly I have spent hours and days, going through papers , search and researching documents, going through my files and on line I even went to the library. Solely to find all the info for banjo and after all that, he comes around and says it is all lies, that I am a liar?
I am not hormonal I am frustrated, have you even seriously read the thread?
I am out , I am out

turbo · Jan 12, 2017

dstudent said:
Double standard much Turbo?

Not really I just wanted him to see your true colours

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

jendan said:
Just out of interest,where does December 1981/January 1982 fit in to the cycle.God,that was cold. I know that it could be just "weather" instead of "climate".

That's interesting, that lands on the exact ( give or take a few years ) change from cold into hotter. It is opposite 1947 in the same place but it is going down the curve in 1947s case, same as we are in 2017.
There is a line that is in the middle of the curve and it dissects going up and when going down, and 1947 on the way down , 1964 bottom, 1981 on the way up, 2017 on the way down.
There seems to be a harsh reaction near the middle.

dstudent · Jan 12, 2017

turbo said:
Not really I just wanted him to see your true colours

Assuming again Mr Turbo, thsi is my intruduction to @jendan after I made this very simple comments

dstudent said:
Again to me this documentary is misusing one issue to drive its narrative. It s much more complex than that. And that is my problem I think with all this, there are so many issues at play.

this what she sent to me , nice right

jendan said:
Yeah right. Its soo complicated to work out that all us educated ones need another few million dollars in research funding to tell the poor plebs what the problem is.

this is how I responded

dstudent said:
No it is not complicated, the research has already been done, books have been written, everything is on the internet nowadays and it is all out there freely accessible for everyone to view, there are historical, social, political and economic reasons underpinning poverty in "developing countries". I ll be very happy to discuss this and exchange ideas @jendan, however I promised @banjo that I will explain my views on the initial video which sparked the all discussion. So I ll get back to this point later on

so now what are my colors again?
There is more right @jendan ? U came at me again and I let it slide again, so do not act all selfrightous now. And @turbo stay off my posts.

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

wilber said:
@banjo Still awaiting evidence on this fact seeing as you keep mentioning it...

Have a feeling i'll be waiting awhile.

WilberI'm not going to argue with you but go to the co2 charts when mt st Helen blew up and see the spike on the co2 chart that year, that proves how much co2 is produced by a volcano. It's that much they remove the spike from the results as they do with all natural spike effects on co2

jendan · Jan 12, 2017

dstudent said:
Assuming again Mr Turbo, thsi is my intruduction to @jendan after I made this very simple comments

this what she sent to me , nice right

this is how I responded

so now what are my colors again?

Nothing wrong with my post there,and certainly not rude.It was sarcastic,but not solely aimed at you.It is the basis on which research funding is secured.

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

Dc student you are getting me all wrong, I'm not blaming you or everyone else, it's the info that's published to you!
The info is genuinely different once it's been through certain stages and this is what's wrong. You take the info from all the latest books and off the Internet and it shows the result they want you to find.
You will have a big moment when you realise it's fabricated, go way back and find the genuine data from older books before global warming existed and was pushed and off the vid I posted before, it's all there staring back at you if you want to see it.
The global warming system is taking the pee out of us all and I'm just trying to rebalance it a bit, not gave a go at anyone.
I've been studying this for ages myself, it's a hobby for me and when I see things that are wrong I say so, thats all.

dstudent · Jan 12, 2017

jendan said:
Nothing wrong with my post there,and certainly not rude.It was sarcastic,but not solely aimed at you.It is the basis on which research funding is secured.

Yes right that was it. You know what i wont patrol your comments stay out of mine. I m out this conversesion is over.

dstudent · Jan 12, 2017

banjo said:
Dc student you are getting me all wrong, I'm not blaming you or everyone else, it's the info that's published to you!
The info is genuinely different once it's been through certain stages and this is what's wrong. You take the info from all the latest books and off the Internet and it shows the result they want you to find.
You will have a big moment when you realise it's fabricated, go way back and find the genuine data from older books before global warming existed and was pushed and off the vid I posted before, it's all there staring back at you if you want to see it.
The global warming system is taking the pee out of us all and I'm just trying to rebalance it a bit, not gave a go at anyone.
I've been studying this for ages myself, it's a hobby for me and when I see things that are wrong I say so, thats all.

So why did u start this thread and ask us to provide u with evidence? I listened to hours of your stuff. I even found and listen to 2 hours of testimony even more actually. Why if u already had reached ur conclusions? I took this seriously man

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

Dr don easterbrook exposes climate change fraud, off u tube has mysteriously been stopped from playing, they have stopped people sharing it.
I posted this a while back and have clicked on it a few times to watch certain bits but now the user has stopped it being shared during today, bit dodgy that isn't it!
Go onto u tube and listen to it, this fella tells the truth of it all, long vid but very good. Dc student, the info is here if you want to see it.

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

dstudent said:
So why did u start this thread and ask us to provide u with evidence? I listened to hours of your stuff. I even found and listen to 2 hours of testimony even more actually. Why if u already had reached ur conclusions? I took this seriously man

It is serious I've gone through all your stuff, and the bits that are wrong are wrong, it's not my fault is it. We both need proper older accurate info, I'm willing to listen if it's correct.

dstudent · Jan 12, 2017

I saw that video is on youtube and I have attached a rebuttal to that. It s in one of my post. If u had read my posts u would have seen it. @banjo it s all good let s agree to desagree. I do wish u a happy new year. Bye. Don

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

dstudent said:
I saw that video is on youtube and I have attached a rebuttal to that. It s in one of my post. If u had read my posts u would have seen it. @banjo it s all good let s agree to desagree. I do wish u a happy new year. Bye. Don

Fair enough, remember idea, data, if data doesn't fit idea, another idea until it does fit.

Not idea, data, data doesn't fit idea, make data fit idea, prove idea even if it's incorrect.

Perfect solution, idea, data, data fits idea, more detailed data, conclusion on results.
All the best anyway, nothing personal.

Old McDonald · Jan 12, 2017

turbo said:
Where's @Old McDonald when you need him

I am here. I was alerted to this post via my email account. Because of that notification, I am moving away from my usual course of chronologically moving through a thread and responding, or not, as I see fit.

Jendan's post is very close to, or possibly is, actionable by those who would care to make an issue of what he posted. It is definitely anti-female, mysogyny I think it is called in modern speak. I do not know the present law in England, but I would certainly never have made such a post.

That, however, does not excuse the most unladylike response of dstudent (with whom I have almost entirely agreed throughout this thread) because to respond in such a way is worse than the language you used against her. She may well feel extremely annoyed at Jendan's post - and with good reason, it was despicable. Yours earlier was too, of course.

Two wrongs never made a right, as the saying goes, and I expect the moderators to move into this thread very soon and close it down. Disagreements and a bit of banter are all well and good, but when posts sink to this level (and remember it was you who started it) then unfortunately everyone interested in a proper debate is denied the opportunity.

Old McDonald · Jan 12, 2017

jendan said:
Surely that figure of 40% is way out? Maybe 40% of the earth surface land area,but not the entire earth surface including the oceans.

OK. I misread pond digger's post about what portion of the earth's surface is farmed as meaning the portion of the world which is able to be farmed. Obviously nobody is conventionally farming the oceans and I am aware that pond digger is an intelligent person who knows that, and also knows that the land area is less than the ocean area.

It is, as I said, approximately 40%. If anyone wants to disagree that figure then go ahead because I am always willing to learn and am quite happy to be corrected.

Old McDonald · Jan 12, 2017

wanton dwarf said:
I seem to remember that one of the main if not the main producer of methane on the African Plains is from Termites converting grass into edible food.

That was a very interesting post. I get the impression that you have done the same as me on wet days and done a bit of googling around things which catch your interest. As with @bovrill's calcium carbonate, termites have some interest for me (partly because I had a few termite hills on the place I owned in Australia) and if you find more info about the I would like to read it.

Old McDonald · Jan 12, 2017

banjo said:
By meaning 6 times as hot was looking at the graph temp compared to the other, you can try and make my statement into something it's not if you want, it's up to you.
1930 was the hottest it's been during the last 100 years from the origional surface temp recordings and the data has been removed in the modelled data, fact.

That does not make any sense at all. I am not trying to make your statements into anything. I am not convinced that the present rise in global temperatures (and it is happening) is entirely the fault of human beings, although as already posted, I accept that we are currently the prime suspects.

I, and other posters, cannot possibly comment in a meaningful way on what you post if you continue to put out inconsistent messages and refuse to give reliable sources that we can read for ourselves. Your persistent means of ending posts with the simple word "fact" adds nothing to your argument.

Come up with some meaningful data and I might well support you.

Old McDonald · Jan 12, 2017

Cowabunga said:
Yes? So? Climate changes. Get used to it.
Up until late last week most scientists had come to the conclusion that there had been no warming over the last 18 years. That was until they decides to change the figures so that it shows otherwise.

I am used to it. What I want to know is,is the current global warming is of anthropogenic origin? If it is then we can do something about it. If it is not, then I think we cannot.

Unfortunately your second paragraph is not factually correct. The general consensus was that (and I dispute the 18 years timescale) there had been a slowing down of the rate of increase over part of that (disputed) timescale.

banjo · Jan 12, 2017

Old McDonald said:
That does not make any sense at all. I am not trying to make your statements into anything. I am not convinced that the present rise in global temperatures (and it is happening) is entirely the fault of human beings, although as already posted, I accept that we are currently the prime suspects.

I, and other posters, cannot possibly comment in a meaningful way on what you post if you continue to put out inconsistent messages and refuse to give reliable sources that we can read for ourselves. Your persistent means of ending posts with the simple word "fact" adds nothing to your argument.

Come up with some meaningful data and I might well support you.

Dr don easterbrook has all the correct data in his vid, the one I posted a while back, listen to it and he put all the modern data against all the correct older data and shows the conclusion. I'm not making anything up, it's a hobby for me.

The great global warming scam, worth a listen I think.

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

0 %

Up to 25%

25-50%

50-75%

75-100%

100% I’ve had enough of farming!

Share this page