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

[linga]

see you know it all ,no point discussing it with you, everyone else who has a different slant or point on the argument are wrong

Not at all.
Come up with a reasoned argument that doesn't misrepresent data and doesn't have an ulterior motive then it's worth considering.

 

[Dave645]

So you think 11 billion people is too many?

I don't think it's a problem we can deal with, it is too many if you look at the fact we use one years of the worlds resources in far less than a year now, but I cannot judge if new technology will come along and redress this and if you think humans controlling our use of CO2 is contentious limiting population will be far more as often it's not the developed countries having large families, it's just that they live longer, and I doubt we will ever see "Logan's run" measures in place.......

 

[Dave645]

I have a problem with the obsession with CO2 levels.
I fully agree that there are far too many of us, we're using up resources at a ridiculous rate, and we've made a mess in a lot of places of a lot of things. Mankind could happily thrive with 75 million of us rather than 7.5 billion, but I'm not volunteering to be one of the 99%!
However, while I appreciate that the atmosphere is far more complicated, I just cannot believe that carbon dioxide is such a driver of temperature changes. Yes, we've increased the amount in the atmosphere hugely, but we were down to an almost critical level for life to continue in it's current form at the end of the last ice age.
The production of calcium carbonate over many millions of years had brought the levels down to the point of insufficient to restart greening in one or two more freezes, and extrapolating back the predicted temperature rises from 280 to 400 ppm into drops from 7000ppm to 180ppm, as has happened during life on earth, just doesn't make sense.

Something is warming the earth, CO2 and other greenhouse gases are the only active ingredient we can see at work so why deny it, and it will not be that the planets to hot to live on that is the problem, it will be food shortages and or mass migrations, where the movement of people will strain resources so start wars. For all we know we are past that point now that current levels given a decade or 2 may lead to food problems, and that's all it will take to destroy what we have now, the world is fractious now, throw in food shortages and it will go to pieces fast.

Edit ,I will add, a lot of what I have read say the CO2 is the trigger to other processes in our atmosphere it's like fuel for an engine the very small amount that moves around the engine but without it the engine is doing nothing. So to little the engine stalls just right the engin idles to much the engine races, at the moment we are racing the engine, with us just looking at taking the foot off the gas. Because we're not sure it's our foot controlling the gas pedal.

 

[Dave645]

What is so special about CO2 ppm in "Roman times"? And how do you really know that increased levels are the sole cause of rising temperatures? The Earths "mass" has been the same for 4 billion years,and the suns output much the same.Why has the Arctic sea ice not already melted,as was forcast by the experts years ago?What caused the Co2 levels to spike millions of years ago,and the previous ice ages?

Well look up ice core data images and you will see why.
Also look up the link I posted about the sea people being the cause of the collapse of all the advanced societies at that time, because they think it was caused by food shortages at a time that the earth was going through a min warming.....So history maybe repeating its self.

 

[Dave645]

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/climate-change-facts
Now I don't class mass media as truly independent and always take anything I read with a pinch of salt, but it makes me think and read and draw my own conclusions from the evidence that is easy to see with my own eyes. If you honestly say that your welcome to believe what you want, just don't try to stop others from doing what they thing is right.

To be honest most of the climate change deniers has shifted position from out and out denying to arguing about the speed it's happening when you see that, it's a good tell it's there motivated position that holding them to their line of thinking not their logic. You don't have to take my word it's in their own words the shift from out and out denying it to it's not happening as fast as the early models predicted it would......

 

[Cowabunga]

Here are two views reports from this year. Both apparently derived from serious scientific research and analysis of global data.

First the 'sooner than thought hypothesis'….

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...warming-will-happen-sooner-than-thought-study

"The world is on track to reach dangerous levels of global warming much sooner than expected, according to new Australian research that highlights the alarming implications of rising energy demand.

University of Queensland and Griffith University researchers have developed a “global energy tracker” which predicts average world temperatures could climb 1.5C above pre-industrial levels by 2020.

That forecast, based on new modelling using long-term average projections on economic growth, population growth and energy use per person, points to a 2C rise by 2030."



Then the 'slower than thought hypothesis'…….

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...ience-myles-allen-michael-grubb-a7954496.html



"The Earth warmed more slowly than the models forecast, meaning the planet has a slightly better chance of meeting the goals set out in the Paris climate agreement, including limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Scientists said previous models may have been “on the hot side”.

Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford and one of the study’s authors told The Times: “We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven’t seen that in the observations.” "

 

[wilber]

The Sun, such a reliable source of scientific information.

 

[Old McDonald]

Now that I have a little time available.............

I know many like to try and say I'm making things up, but I ain't. This chap is a member of the climate change committee from Denmark and he's changed his mind about the heating of the earth to cooling and that's a fact.

There is no evidence whatsoever in that link, not a single weather station record, to give credence to the title of the video. Temperatures are still rising.

Climate change temps are taken at an average over 30 years period, all the spikes are taken out thus leaving an average of 1/10th of a degree warming in the last 20 years.

Wrong again. Temperatures are recorded as they happen, at least once per day for max and min. Many stations monitor temps much more frequently. The graphs which people make up from these recordings need not be a curve, although they usually are because of the difficulty of visually representing a point for every day. They are made over whatever timescale the person making up the graph chooses. You have posted many links on this thread showing graphs over different timescales than 30 years.

Just to make things clear all the links I post are correct data given by very qualified people, dr easterbrook data has been proven correct and he gave evidence to the American commitees cos he is a climate expert

Your link at #934 showed Easterbrook to be absolutely and completely wrong. I did post to tell you this at #936, but obviously you decided either not to see that, or do not understand what Easterbrook was predicting. He predicted a considerable decrease in temperature before the present time. He was wrong.

I don't put anything up that's untrue because I actualy want the true facts about the situation. All the data shows that those for climate change have no conclusive evidence of man made global warming, it's that simple. There is an argument against it that has just as much evidence showing its a natural cyclic change caused by the sun spot activity, and that's my belief.

Almost every link you post shows the converse of what you claim you believe. Watch them again. Take into account the many posts where I have shown you that they contain false information or actual figures opposing what you claim. #934 is a prime example.

This is simply incorrect, that huge spikes the the end is modelled data not measured data and even the people on the climate change committee agree that it hasn't been warming for the last 17 years, one chap from Denmark who's on the committee says it on the vid I post above this post.
Supressed data showing true climate conditions show the spike is false.

But you posted immediately before this, at #954, that temperatures are rising.

Here is a measured fact for everyone that is correct. The harbour by Sidney opera house has had the sea level measured for the last 100 years and it's total rise in that time is 34 cm, yes that is not a typo, the total sea level rise per year is 3.5mm and has been the same for the last 100 years. This is measured data before fiddling.

I do not know where you obtain your supposed “facts”, but in this instance you must be referring to Fort Denison in Sydney harbour.

Just to remind you of your various posts on this thread about the rise in sea levels. You have posted that these have been:

#169 - 20cms a century for 300 years

#215and 219 - 6” for the last century and 18” in 300 years.

#440 - Constant 6” a century over a long time.

#650 - 6” a century for 300 years.

#666 - 6” a century.

So, ignoring your first post on the matter, it seems you have settled for 6” a century over three centuries. This is despite the fact that at #637 I gave you the correct figures of 2cms to 1800; 6cms to 1900 and 18cms to 2000.

You now report that Fort Denison recorded a massive 34cms in a century!!

The actual figure for that station, which is on the east coast of Australia, one of the lowest increasing sea levels on the globe, was 6.5cms, i.e. 0.65mm per year. You claim it had a rise of twice the global average.

Here is a link from Australia’s best known GW sceptic Joanne Nova. I know you are not going to disagree with her because she is most firmly on your side of the debate http://joannenova.com.au/2014/12/sy...st-6-5cm-per-century-peak-panic-is-behind-us/

I used data from elsewhere to obtain the same figures. Where did you get your info?

There are some stations that have recorded sea level decreases elsewhere in the world. Why did you not quote some of those to make your point?

You see it's very easy to argue against the data you global warming clones produce because every prediction over the last 20 years has been proved wrong by factual measured data. Sea level rise 3.5mm a year for the last 100 years, arctic ice increasing in volume during the last few years, earth temp only risen 1/10th degree over the last 20 years. My data is correct and proven to be correct, all the global warming predictions miles out and documented to be incorrect, you can't hide from your predictions as it's been on telly frightening people for 20 years, it's that simple.

Not one of your better posts. You seriously contradict many of your previous posts, and as already demonstrated to you, your predictions, and those of your hero Easterbrook, that temperatures are falling, is simply not correct. I agree that much of the data shown in your links is correct because many of them show the opposite of what you claim.

Global warming and your side predicted 11feet over the last 20years, actual rise 68mm ( just under 3 inches )
Who's the idiot, the man who reads actual correct data, or the one that follows the crowd ?

It appears you could be fairly near the mark with this post. If sea levels have indeed risen as much as 68mm in the last 20 years that is an enormous problem for millions of people. See just a few of the short articles in this link https://www.nasa.gov/goddard/risingseas

68mm in 20 years would give you 34cms in a century. Is there a link between the figure you quote here and that for Fort Denison? Such a rise might happen, but that would be conjecture. I believe in sticking with actual records. At the same time, I do accept that on a global basis, sea level rises are accelerating. There would be disastrous consequences for at least one billion people if such a rise did occur.

Your just being daft now. The event that's just happening at the moment proves you are wrong. One large solar flare hitting the earth head on heating the earth and creating massive storms with the solar winds, this has altered the earths climate in days, not years. If you hava any brain activity you would realise it. Increased sun spot activity heats the earth, decreased activity cools it and this solar flare proves it all correct. You must of stood outside yesterday and looked at the sky and the heat because of it and it took all of 3 days to change the earths climate.
During the 1990s other planets close to the sun had the same warming we had at that time, an ice cap melted half away on one of them because these planets feel the same heat or cooling as we do.
NASA and noaa show it all happening now, not made up data correct instant data, why do you think they are not mentioning it on the news about the massive explosion on the sun, it's because it proves the man made global warming theory wrong in many ways.
The sun drives the climate on the earth and always will do.

Solar flares do not increase temperatures on the earth. In this modern age they do cause problems, occasionally extreme, with communication and other technological gadgets.

You only need to read the first paragraph of this link:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/do-solar-storms-cause-heat-waves-earth

You obviously do not remember, or choose to ignore, the information I provided for you at #605 and #646 regarding solar activity.


My own records show that temperatures for the few days leading up to the weekend of 9/10 Sept were between 30.2 and 32.7ºC . The max for the 9th showed a dramatic decrease to 24.3. Four days later they were topping 30 again.

I know you cannot tell me your actual temps because you do not record them. You could, though, tell us all what your nearest weather station recorded. Go on, just for once, give us some actual figures. You know what I mean – those figures you keep telling us are manipulated at a later date and smoothed out. At the very least tell us which is your nearest official weather station and I will provide the info on your behalf.

 

[Old McDonald]

Err, I haven't bothered following this thread because frankly I don't have the stamina or energy . . .
I don't really care what anyone thinks, but I'll just stick to my conviction that climate change is real & farmers potentially have the most to lose. Farmers here, Pacific Island states, banks, insurance companies, military forces etc etc are all planning for, including the potential in their risk management. I will readily acknowledge that the UK is probably more immune to the effects in the short term - until all the climate change refugees come looking for water & a bearable climate that is . . . I know refugees / immigration / scary brown skinned people are a big issue now, but believe me, you ain't seen nothing yet
Anyway, I just thought this weeks forecast was interesting, showing you some of the sh!t we are having to deal with. Bear in mind, this is the second week of our spring & our location is roughly 31 S 150 E to give you an idea where we compare with the UK / Europe
@Old McDonald may be interested anyway . . .
View attachment 576986

Sorry to have taken so long, but I have not had time for frivolities such as TFF for quite a while. I posted a tag to you more for your input on how short a growing season you have for winter cereals as compared to the UK rather than your take on global warming. When do you normally sow and harvest? Are the seasons becoming shorter? A guesstimate, but how do you rate the frost risk in recent years?

That 30+ temp so early is quite a worry. As, of course, is a late frost. After the big drop on the "sunspot" weekend we have climbed back up again and not long before dark tonight I had a look at the thermometer and saw it was 30.7 which is about 10º more than the recent years' max at this time of year. Not good. Olive harvest starts about 20th of the month and I can forsee a lot of very small fruit this year for most producers, resulting in a poor yield.

 

[Old McDonald]

Here are two views reports from this year. Both apparently derived from serious scientific research and analysis of global data.

First the 'sooner than thought hypothesis'….

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...warming-will-happen-sooner-than-thought-study

"The world is on track to reach dangerous levels of global warming much sooner than expected, according to new Australian research that highlights the alarming implications of rising energy demand.

University of Queensland and Griffith University researchers have developed a “global energy tracker” which predicts average world temperatures could climb 1.5C above pre-industrial levels by 2020.

That forecast, based on new modelling using long-term average projections on economic growth, population growth and energy use per person, points to a 2C rise by 2030."



Then the 'slower than thought hypothesis'…….

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...ience-myles-allen-michael-grubb-a7954496.html



"The Earth warmed more slowly than the models forecast, meaning the planet has a slightly better chance of meeting the goals set out in the Paris climate agreement, including limiting global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Scientists said previous models may have been “on the hot side”.

Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford and one of the study’s authors told The Times: “We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven’t seen that in the observations.” "

Still warming though. The speed seems to be the only argument. I think nobody can predict what the future speed will be. The only thing that appears certain, given your two quotes, is that temperatures are still increasing and are likely to continue doing so.

 

[roscoe erf]

The Sun, such a reliable source of scientific information.

you used to only look on page 3 to see if it was cold or not

 

[Cowabunga]

Still warming though. The speed seems to be the only argument. I think nobody can predict what the future speed will be. The only thing that appears certain, given your two quotes, is that temperatures are still increasing and are likely to continue doing so.

That is certainly NOT a safe long term assumption. It is highly unlikely if you look at historical data.

Currently the climate is changing, as it always has done. The main argument is how much humans are influencing the rate of change. My above recent references show that there is still little certainty about this.

 

[linga]

That is certainly NOT a safe long term assumption. It is highly unlikely if you look at historical data.

Currently the climate is changing, as it always has done. The main argument is how much humans are influencing the rate of change. My above recent references show that there is still little certainty about this.

Current knowledge suggests that in the absence of any hithertoo discovered forcing or feedback or additional human interference such as geoengineering then temperatures will continue to rise and would do so for many years even if no more co2 was added to the atmosphere

 

[Gong Farmer]

Sorry to have taken so long, but I have not had time for frivolities such as TFF for quite a while. I posted a tag to you more for your input on how short a growing season you have for winter cereals as compared to the UK rather than your take on global warming. When do you normally sow and harvest? Are the seasons becoming shorter? A guesstimate, but how do you rate the frost risk in recent years?

That 30+ temp so early is quite a worry. As, of course, is a late frost. After the big drop on the "sunspot" weekend we have climbed back up again and not long before dark tonight I had a look at the thermometer and saw it was 30.7 which is about 10º more than the recent years' max at this time of year. Not good. Olive harvest starts about 20th of the month and I can forsee a lot of very small fruit this year for most producers, resulting in a poor yield.

Thank you so much for blessing us here on this frivolity with your wisdom. We are (apparently) not worthy.

 

[Cowabunga]

Current knowledge suggests that in the absence of any hithertoo discovered forcing or feedback or additional human interference such as geoengineering then temperatures will continue to rise and would do so for many years even if no more co2 was added to the atmosphere

Indeed that may well be the case in the relatively short term. I refer you to the two reports I previously referenced which show the degree of uncertainty in all these forecasts very well.
Any climate forecasts for the medium to long term [hundreds of years] seem to be pure speculation.

 

[linga]

Indeed that may well be the case in the relatively short term. I refer you to the two reports I previously referenced which show the degree of uncertainty in all these forecasts very well.
Any climate forecasts for the medium to long term [hundreds of years] seem to be pure speculation.

Think the two reports are showing uncertainty within the already acknowledged error anyway so nothing new and I suspect you are wrong to assume that climate forecasts for only a hundred years or so are speculative.
Unless of couse there is a massive volcanic eruption or something. It would have to be massive because it would take several pinatubos every year to make a sustained difference to the continuing warming

 

[banjo]

8 foot drifts in October!

 

[banjo]

All past and current tide measurements including sea level rise for hundreds of years. The data is all in the links below the vidio explaining it, no false data here, it's measured data not modelled data.

 

[Dave645]

8 foot drifts in October!

It's intresting but what do you think this proves, all it says to me is disrupted weather patterns, it has no actual direct effect on globle average temperature, unless it's cold everywhere in unseasonable ways.
But we know that's not true because warmer seas than normal triggered lots of hurricanes.....for every story you find on cold weather there is likely to be 2 on warmer than normal weather.

 

[Dave645]

All past and current tide measurements including sea level rise for hundreds of years. The data is all in the links below the vidio explaining it, no false data here, it's measured data not modelled data.

It was a laugh if nothing else I especialy liked the Statue of Liberty pic at they end, even thought he admitted to sea level rise of 2mm a year he then claimed it had fallen in the time between the photo's. Not the more likely, explanation the tide was a different point, talk about trying to be misleading.....if you want to belive go ahead just don't expect us to,
I also liked the last slide showing the comparision between satellite data and the hand measured data, the hand measured rise was above the satellite data's rise. If your going to shoot satellite data down don't use a pic that shows it's measured rise, is less than the measured rise at tide locations he says is more accurate....LOL he just undid his own lies with one picture.....