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

[Old McDonald]

Never mind, I told you a 1947 type storm would be here 6 months ago, no one would listen, it's here and it's happening now.

Everybody heard you. Or at least read what you posted. You were wrong. It is not happening now. How can you possibly compare what has occurred with 1947, 1963 or 1979 late winters? There is very little snow about. Read the weather threads on this forum for an up to date report on what is happening. How many people are totally cut off? How deep, or rather how shallow, is the snow? Do you actually believe what you post? If so, I feel sorry for you, and mopre especially, those who live with you.

I cannot remember 1947 (I was only 3) but I do have not very good experiences of 1963 and 1979, and by all accounts they were not so severe as 1947. We had a couple of very bad deep snow winters on the Black Isle in the late 1990s, but modern snow clearing, even our own tractors, meant there was not really a problem compared with earlier times.

What are your forecasts for the UK summer? Especially where you live.

 

[ollie989898]

Arctic ice sheet is larger and thicker on average than before?

Tell that to the shipping companies taking their ships through the passage...

 

[Farmer Roy]

Australian farmers take climate change very seriously.

https://www.farmersforclimateaction.org.au/

We are going to be hit hard & hit early. But mark my words, human civilisation & agriculture has relied on very stable global conditions for the last 10,000 years or so. Any shift from that & we'll all end up like this poor bugger

Banjo claims we are all "scared of the truth"
Too f**king right, I am sh!t scared of the truth. I wish humans hadn't stuffed our environment. I wish atmospheric carbon levels weren't rising. I wish we weren't racing to our own annihilation, digging up & burning fossil fuels without a care in the world. I wish people like banjo weren't in such extreme denial.
Afraid of the truth - I'm f**king sh!t scared of the truth. But acting like it's a hoax doesn't achieve much

 

[Farmer Roy]

Did someone say cold weather proves CLIMATE CHANGE doesn't exist ???

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1150210608453778

 

[Dave645]

You are a bunch of global warming loons ( the global warming religion ), your so afraid of the truth you have to tag me and upload to try and bury the truth, it's actually funny!
Never mind, I told you a 1947 type storm would be here 6 months ago, no one would listen, it's here and it's happening now.
Spain and many other so called warm places are experiencing the same, by the way the teacup explanation of the cold is laughable, it's actualy caused by the lower magnetic field on the earth, due to less sun spot activity, thus in turn moves the slipstream and it drops down to touch the uk, simple stuff.

I have struggled to find any data that backs up your claim that sun spots are effecting our magnetic field, which would be odd as it's generated by Earths spinning molten core but I did find this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5334421/Earths-magnetic-poles-signs-FLIP.html

But I don't see how the Earths magnetic poles flipping on a 200,000 year cycle but it's delayed and it's been 780,000 years since the last has anything to do with sun spots.... you seem to be making new scientific break through all the time, it would be nice if you supplied sources for your claims it would stop me having to look them up and failing to find any.... I know which of us sounds like a loon. Your own data doesn't support your claims.....

The sad thing is, you think I want climate change to be true, against all evidence to the contrary the fact is I want it to be not happening and you be right, I am in the camp of facts, when the facts agree with you, you will not have to convince me.

I just cannot see the need for a big conspiracy to trick everyone that climate change is real, and that's been basicly your argument against all our data, that and your lack of verifiable evidence mostly YouTube videos of what other people claim to be true. That you seem to have blind faith in.
I have come to the conclusion your just doing it for fun now, to wind us all up, your like the flat Earthers either incredibly stupid or out to wind people up....... and I don't think your stupid, gullible maybe.... but I think the most likely truth is your winding us all up or doing it for some other agenda......

 

[Campani]

You are a bunch of global warming loons ( the global warming religion ), your so afraid of the truth you have to tag me and upload to try and bury the truth, it's actually funny!
Never mind, I told you a 1947 type storm would be here 6 months ago, no one would listen, it's here and it's happening now.
Spain and many other so called warm places are experiencing the same, by the way the teacup explanation of the cold is laughable, it's actualy caused by the lower magnetic field on the earth, due to less sun spot activity, thus in turn moves the slipstream and it drops down to touch the uk, simple stuff.

did you predict the record warm weather in the arctic?

 

[Old McDonald]

The sad thing is, you think I want climate change to be true, against all evidence to the contrary the fact is I want it to be not happening and you be right, I am in the camp of facts, when the facts agree with you, you will not have to convince me.

Me too, and I should think most other folks.

 

[Old McDonald]

It is raining today and whilst looking for some old information about ploughing in snow (I have already posted to that thread) I came across these diary entries by William Brewis of Mitford, Northumberland. He was brother to an ancestor of the late Henry Brewis. I have copied William’s spelling and grammar:

1837. Sat 11 March. Snow laid. Mon 13th A great fall of snow this morning. It is laid one foot thick. Sun 19th All covered with snow and the wind north-east. Mon 20th All covered with snow. Thu 23rd A stormy day and still more snow, quite drift from the north-east. Fri 24th Good Friday..Still snow and very stormy, the ground is all covered. Sat 25th A severe frost and like nothing but snow, no ploughs can go. Sun 26th Snow, Easter Sunday. Mon 27th Easter Monday, Morpeth Horse Fair, a very stormy day, perpetual snow. Tue 28th Frost and snow, such a season never was seen. Every day snow, sheep and cattle will be lost. Wed 29th Snow and frost and no likelihood of being any better, fodder is scarce.

He wrote of more snow into April and finally

Fri 2nd June A dry cold day but the Spring is bad, no grass. Cheviot Hills is covered with Snow.

Some members might be wondering what this has to do with this thread. The answer is sunspots. I decided to do a bit of checking on late winter snows and sunspot activity. The next obvious year after this 1837 information was 1947 when there was similar very late snow.

Try this lot for starters. The link to the full article that immediately follows is http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1948PASP...60...98N

SUNSPOT ACTIVITY DURING 1947

Seth B. Nicholson Mount Wilson Observatory

During 1947 sunspots were more numerous than during any other year of the past century. The mean relative sunspot number for May 1947 was 206,5, the second largest for any month since 1749, which was the first year for which monthly relative sunspot numbers have been assigned. The only larger number was 238.9, for May 1778. In December 1836 the mean number was 206.2, essentially the same as that for last May. Only two other months, January 1837 and October 1847, have had relative sunspot numbers larger than 180.

{N.B. I cannot properly copy the table, but it is observed sunspots in the years 1945, 46 and 47. It clearly shows that the numbers of sunspots observed in 1947 was far greater than the previous two years.}

TABLE I Mean Number of Sunspot Groups Observed Daily

1945 January 2.5 February .... 1.1 March 1.9 April 2.8 May 3.6 June 3.8 1946 4.2 7.7 6.7 7.1 7.2 7.3 1947 9.9 10.5 11.8 11.5 16.8 13.4 July August ... September October ., November December 1945 4.4 2.8 3.6 5.7 5.1 2.9 1946 8.2 8.5 8.9 9.8 9.8 8.5 1947 12.9 14.1 13.7 12.4 10.8 10.1 Yearly average 3.4 7.8 12.3

The great group of 1947 was first seen on February 5, 1947, at the east limb of the sun in latitude 23° south. Its spots were quite small on that date but they grew rapidly, until by February 7 they formed a group large enough to be seen without a telescope. When, after a solar rotation, the group reappeared at the east limb on March 3, it was composed primarily of one huge spot, the. largest single spot on record, with an area of five billion square miles, 4300- millionths of a solar hemisphere. When it reappeared on March 30 for its third transit, the huge group, although separated into several spots, had increased in area. Its maximum area, measured at Greenwich,2 was over six billion square miles, 5400-millionths of a solar hemisphere.

...................................

Solar cycle 8 was the eighth solar cycle since 1755, when extensive recording of solar sunspot activity began.[1][2] The solar cycle lasted 9.7 years, beginning in November 1833 and ending in July 1843. The maximum smoothed sunspot number (SIDC formula) observed during the solar cycle was 244.9 (March 1837), and the starting minimum was 12.2.[3]

...................................


If lack of sunspots gives us heavy late snowfall, how come two very bad late snow years were exceptionally high in sunspots at the time of these storms?

 

[Farmer Roy]

Another case of Australian farmers recognising & having to adapt to climate change

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10155402081455954

 

[FonterraFarmer]

Can anyone expand or explain the term "pre climate change" as used by the media on TV?, Was used in a context that seemed to imply a fixed point in "time" and a point of reference that every one knows and not requiring further explanation. Or is it back in the days of global warming before the termninology "climate change" became more politically correct?

 

[Old McDonald]

Can anyone expand or explain the term "pre climate change" as used by the media on TV?,

I have never heard the expression, and I assume those who use it are intending it to be a modern time. Nobody should claim that the climate has only been changing recently, and I think the expression "climate change" to refer to rising temperatures is wrong.

This old article from NASA explains why they use c.c. and not g.w. and I would not argue with them, because they are looking at many more issues than rising temperatures. Temperature rise is the issue that affects me and my life more than the others so I still think in terms of g.w. rather than c.c. You will see from the article that c.c. has been in use since before some posters on here were born, so it is not new.

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html

 

[linga]

I thought this was an interesting demonstration of how CO2 levels have changed during the last 800,000 years.
Methane level changes likewise

https://skepticalscience.com/Consequences.html

 

[NZDan]

People who say fossil fuels aren't accelerating climate change can never agree on what's happening. Just on this forum I have heard:

- volcanoes are the cause of co2
-solar cycles are the cause of rising temperatures
- there is no rising temperatures.
-It's the same change that has all ways happened.
- it's the oceans that release co2.

Don't forget having children is the single most damaging thing you can do for the environment and for the climate. I think every person who has offspring shoud be charged a levie and that levie should be given to all over 35 year olds with no children.

 

[Old McDonald]

Don't forget having children is the single most damaging thing you can do for the environment and for the climate. I think every person who has offspring shoud be charged a levie and that levie should be given to all over 35 year olds with no children.

Not having children means the end of humanity. I agree that it would be sensible to lower the number of humans on the planet, but stopping having them at all is not really an option is it?

So would I have had to pay the levy back a few years after I was 35 and my one and only son was born?

What about all those who father children outside of a formal relationship and so are not "known" to authorities as fathers?

What if someone fathers children with somebody other than his wife? Should the wife have to pay a levy? Or is she given the amount that the other woman would have to pay?

You have not thought through what you are suggesting have you?

 

[banjo]

 

[Campani]

No solar sunspots, so no abnormal weather this week?

 

[Dave645]

Don't forget having children is the single most damaging thing you can do for the environment and for the climate. I think every person who has offspring shoud be charged a levie and that levie should be given to all over 35 year olds with no children.

More like, put the money in a fund to pay for their care when they have no family to look after them in old age, but why charge the parents with children for that better to tax the over 35's without children they will have more disposable income, with no family to support... lol... joking aside your right thought we are the most damaging element on Earth, and you don't need to talk about climate change to say that. Climate change aside we still are. But it's unlikely we will have enforced birth control, would it be wise.... yes, will it happen,,,, no.
If you realy want to be controversial base family size on IQ that will start a s..t storm. Any family can have one child only families above a set IQ can have more.... at least it's attempting to continue natural selection. I suppose an argument for physical prowess should also be added into any system, or go the whole hog DNA screen people for genetic problems.....
As terrible as any system like that would be it is up holding some elements of natural selection, to be honest, I don't think we need to do any of it, we will see a natural disaster or pandemic which will do it, it will be less discriminate but people will except it. As the population grows so do the chances of a disaster..... that or we will destroy the planet, so badly we will run out of food, and that will definalty do it.....

 

[phillipe]

More like, put the money in a fund to pay for their care when they have no family to look after them in old age, but why charge the parents with children for that better to tax the over 35's without children they will have more disposable income, with no family to support... lol... joking aside your right thought we are the most damaging element on Earth, and you don't need to talk about climate change to say that. Climate change aside we still are. But it's unlikely we will have enforced birth control, would it be wise.... yes, will it happen,,,, no.
If you realy want to be controversial base family size on IQ that will start a s..t storm. Any family can have one child only families above a set IQ can have more.... at least it's attempting to continue natural selection. I suppose an argument for physical prowess should also be added into any system, or go the whole hog DNA screen people for genetic problems.....
As terrible as any system like that would be it is up holding some elements of natural selection, to be honest, I don't think we need to do any of it, we will see a natural disaster or pandemic which will do it, it will be less discriminate but people will except it. As the population grows so do the chances of a disaster..... that or we will destroy the planet, so badly we will run out of food, and that will definalty do it.....

The population of the world will hit 10 billion ,then you can buy all the electric cars you like it wont make a jot of difference,

 

[Dave645]

The population of the world will hit 10 billion ,then you can buy all the electric cars you like it wont make a jot of difference,

I would disagree, we had over a billion cars in the world, in 2010 with millions more every year, if we move them over to Alternative non polluting cars at half the increase rate now and go to closer to 100% over the next ten years they will make a big difference to our towns and cities, and their pollution levels. I understand the 10 billion population is going to be bad but less so if they drive electric cars, I cannot agree with your statement " you can buy all the electric cars you like it wont make a jot of difference" it isn't quite true. We will live in a cleaner less polluted world. And we will be pumping out less co2 sure we will start to see problems in our food supplies unless we innovate their as well.

Changing the subject away from populations.

I actualy think electric cars are going mainstream and fast most of the exciting new cars are electric .what most people forget is if they install their own solar they can reduce the running costs of an electric car to a fraction of a petrol car, add in reduced servicing costs reduced moving parts the increasing range and hopfully reducing battery prices, electric cars will be cheaper to buy and run. With new battery tech on the horizon that's also less prone to fire, not that petrol wasn't... lol. They will be safer in a crash. Charging problems are been fixed by faster charging where you can get 80% in 30 min and ranges going up the barriers are falling all the time.
Mr uk average does 12k miles a year well under the average range of an electric car, most are doing over 280miles on a charge that's once a week charging for most people, if they have solar that's going to be free, they need a service every now and then less so that normal cars so an electric car will save £1200 in fuel a year at £5/gallon for mr average plus service only every 4 years then it's only brake fluid brakes and tyres, no engine servicing needed, so another £100/ £300 saved depending if you do your own servicing. If you own it from 10 years that's a saving of £13k/15k maybe more with road tax saving and other incentives.
If electric cars were 30k to buy a good one with the savings it's only costing you 15k actualy unlike the same petrol car at 30k which cost you 15k to run is actualy costing you 45k and talking about the last bit sale value fuel cars are likely to lose far more value as people shift over to electric cars, where the electric cars will retain more value especially if battery replacment gets cheaper, than fuel cars of the same value.

I also think that electric cars will become central to the uk power grid, users will get incentives to allow the grid to use car batteries to help the grid at peak times so when plugged in power can flow both ways, and I get payed when it does, or for allowing it. It would be simple i program my range needs and they can work within that so I have a daily use of 60 miles my car has a range of 300 my car charges and discharges while always leaving me my 60 miles range, if I want all of my range it only charges. Throw in solar I charge at work using cheap solar the grid pumps into my car I come home and power my home with it at peak times, and if I have solar at home and so is my car it charges my car then I use my car in the evening as a mini grid just retaining the charge I need for the next day, or recharge at night rates off peak electric. Back to that min if I only need it after 7am, it charges the car so it hits my set minimum by 7am....
The same can be said for places like India where the car and a solar system bring people electric and transport for the first time, battery banks can bring power to any location on earth with sunlight.
So electric cars are going to be central to our world and make it a cheaper cleaner more efficient place to live, and will drive down living costs in real terms. Throw in your own solar system and another battery bank permanently at home you get the most savings possible. Which will be a fraction of if we stay as we are.

 

[phillipe]

I would disagree, we had over a billion cars in the world, in 2010 with millions more every year, if we move them over to Alternative non polluting cars at half the increase rate now and go to closer to 100% over the next ten years they will make a big difference to our towns and cities, and their pollution levels. I understand the 10 billion population is going to be bad but less so if they drive electric cars, I cannot agree with your statement " you can buy all the electric cars you like it wont make a jot of difference" it isn't quite true. We will live in a cleaner less polluted world. And we will be pumping out less co2 sure we will start to see problems in our food supplies unless we innovate their as well.

Changing the subject away from populations.

I actualy think electric cars are going mainstream and fast most of the exciting new cars are electric .what most people forget is if they install their own solar they can reduce the running costs of an electric car to a fraction of a petrol car, add in reduced servicing costs reduced moving parts the increasing range and hopfully reducing battery prices, electric cars will be cheaper to buy and run. With new battery tech on the horizon that's also less prone to fire, not that petrol wasn't... lol. They will be safer in a crash. Charging problems are been fixed by faster charging where you can get 80% in 30 min and ranges going up the barriers are falling all the time.
Mr uk average does 12k miles a year well under the average range of an electric car, most are doing over 280miles on a charge that's once a week charging for most people, if they have solar that's going to be free, they need a service every now and then less so that normal cars so an electric car will save £1200 in fuel a year at £5/gallon for mr average plus service only every 4 years then it's only brake fluid brakes and tyres, no engine servicing needed, so another £100/ £300 saved depending if you do your own servicing. If you own it from 10 years that's a saving of £13k/15k maybe more with road tax saving and other incentives.
If electric cars were 30k to buy a good one with the savings it's only costing you 15k actualy unlike the same petrol car at 30k which cost you 15k to run is actualy costing you 45k and talking about the last bit sale value fuel cars are likely to lose far more value as people shift over to electric cars, where the electric cars will retain more value especially if battery replacment gets cheaper, than fuel cars of the same value.

I also thing that electric cars will become central to the uk power grid, users will get incentives to allow the grid to use car batteries to help the grid at peak times so when plugged in power can flow both ways, and I get payed when it does, or for allowing it. It would be simple i program my range needs and they can work within that so I have a daily use of 60 miles my car has a range of 300 my car charges and discharges while always leaving me my 60 miles range, if I want all of my range it only charges. Throw in solar I charge at work using cheap solar the grid pumps into my car I come home and power my home with it at peak times, and if I have solar at home and so is my car it charges my car then I use my car in the evening as a mini grid just retaining the charge I need for the next day, or recharge at night rates off peak electric. Back to that min if I only need it after 7am, it charges the car so it hits my set minimum by 7am....
The same can be said for places like India where the car and a solar system bring people electric and transport for the first time, battery banks can bring power to any location on earth with sunlight.
So electric cars are going to be central to our world and make it a cheaper cleaner more efficient place to live, and will drive down living costs in real terms. Throw in your own solar system and another battery bank permanently at home you get the most savings possible. Which will be a fraction of if we stay as we are.

Too many people for earths resources,that will be the begining of the end