|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 2, 2023 22:24:42 GMT
So far no one has actually ventured an opinion as to what is expected of Mr Average in order to combat catastrophic AGW. It seems net zero is the only game in town but it is not clear what that entails for the great British Public. There seems to be target dates but very few detailed plans if any. Of course if we are buying from abroad then all we are doing is exporting our Carbon Emissions which I am pretty sure is not the purpose of net zero.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 3, 2023 6:42:57 GMT
Richard Tice .... Who is he ?, what the F does he know ?, is he a scientist, is he qualified in science ? Quoting a right wing populist with no background what so ever in science isent going to do any Climate Change Sceptic's argument any good at all, on the contrary it proves how utterly silly climate change sceptics really are. One man who I will trust ... a man very well qualified in Natural Sciences, Zoology and Earth Science, a man who is highly respected, a national treasure - Sir David Attenborough. Who would YOU believe on a scientific issue, Richard Tice or Sir David Attenborough ? www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOctIuyVfnAIf you take the time to view 3 minute 40 second video, note who the speakers are .. scientists and professors from NASA, climate scientists from eminent universities, including Harvard, and including Mike Benners Lee, brother of the man who invented the internet, and who is a world renowned and respected scientist on the climate. Speakers include scientists from The Met Office, but of course steppenwolf and others will no doubt say all these people are wrong. On that clip, Richard Tice was simply pointing out that the evidence presented for CO2 warming has been fiddled, and he gave a run down of the various scandals that have occurred when "scientists" have been caught. You don't have to be a scientist to be able to understand that the data that has been put forward to support the claim that CO2 is the primary cause of global warming has been fiddled. If you look at the original data there is no support for the CO2 theory. There have been periods when temperature has increased with no change in CO2 levels and periods when CO2 has increased significantly but there has been no increase in temperature. In fact Tice is not making any claims about climate change whatsoever. He's very aware that he isn't qualified to do so - but he has a perfect right to point out the facts and ask questions. If you'd watched his programs you'd know that he gives people with all sorts of different views the opportunity to explain their position - unlike the BBC which only allows those who support the orthodoxy to speak. On the subject of David Attenborough I don't think he makes any claims about CO2 causing climate change. In fact he used to blame the problems on population growth, but he doesn't talk about that anymore - it's not PC. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 3, 2023 21:28:44 GMT
More dodgy data and climate scientists disagreeing with the catastrophe narrative. www.climatedepot.com/2023/08/03/top-climate-scientists-rubbish-claims-july-was-the-hottest-month-ever-public-being-misinformed-on-a-massive-scale/“Hot enough for you? Thank a MAGA Republican. Or better yet, vote them out of office,” tweeted former Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton last week. "The IMF cancelled a scheduled talk by Nobel prize winner John Clauser last week after he publicly stated: “I can confidently say there is no real climate crisis, and that climate change does not cause extreme weather events.”".. "Apparently, all those people missed the fact that they were looking at the output of a climate model, not actually measured temperatures. Only one news outlet, The Associated Press, bothered to print a sensible caveat…The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration distanced itself from the designation, compiled by the University of Maine’s Climate Reanalyzer, which uses satellite data and computer simulations to measure the world’s condition…." And so it goes on... |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Aug 4, 2023 5:57:08 GMT
Richard Tice (in his "Sunday Sermon") gave a brief historical rundown of the lies and dodgy data that has been used, over the years, to persuade gullible people about CO2 and warming. Here's the clip - the interesting bit starts at 7 minutes 15 seconds and is about 15 minutes long. It's worth listening to - it's all well sourced stuff. link Just another rehash of isolated incidents. AGW can't be happening because someone fudged the figures in a document 7 years ago etc. I expect the ocean temperatures currently being recorded are wrong because of that fudged information. I bet the ice caps are not melting because someone lied in 1990. And the glaciers will stop receding once we realise they lied to us. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Aug 4, 2023 6:39:47 GMT
Richard Tice (in his "Sunday Sermon") gave a brief historical rundown of the lies and dodgy data that has been used, over the years, to persuade gullible people about CO2 and warming. Here's the clip - the interesting bit starts at 7 minutes 15 seconds and is about 15 minutes long. It's worth listening to - it's all well sourced stuff. link Just another rehash of isolated incidents. AGW can't be happening because someone fudged the figures in a document 7 years ago etc. I expect the ocean temperatures currently being recorded are wrong because of that fudged information. I bet the ice caps are not melting because someone lied in 1990. And the glaciers will stop receding once we realise they lied to us. You seem to be unable to understand what the argument is about, zany, despite being reminded regularly. Let's try again. The argument is NOT that the climate is not changing - it changes all the time by either sudden events or gradually. The argument is about the causes of the current period of warming. You and the climate lobby are claiming that the primary cause of temperature rise is man-made CO2 - and you claim that 97% of scientists back this claim. The trouble is that the 97% claim is a complete misinterpretation of the figures (as SP has shown above) and that the only way that any correlation between CO2 and temperatures has been achieved (even roughly) is by fiddling the figures on a fairly large scale. And it is quite important because, if the West is going to bankrupt its economies by eliminating CO2 emissions it would be a pity if it made absolutely no difference - which is actually what the REAL data indicates. So the fiddling of the figures is very relevant. IMO the real killer fact is that the data is being filtered by processing through the climate models. In other words data that doesn't fit the theory is deleted. It's absolutely classic. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Aug 4, 2023 13:13:12 GMT
Just another rehash of isolated incidents. AGW can't be happening because someone fudged the figures in a document 7 years ago etc. I expect the ocean temperatures currently being recorded are wrong because of that fudged information. I bet the ice caps are not melting because someone lied in 1990. And the glaciers will stop receding once we realise they lied to us. You seem to be unable to understand what the argument is about, zany, despite being reminded regularly. Let's try again. The argument is NOT that the climate is not changing - it changes all the time by either sudden events or gradually. The argument is about the causes of the current period of warming. You and the climate lobby are claiming that the primary cause of temperature rise is man-made CO2 - and you claim that 97% of scientists back this claim. The trouble is that the 97% claim is a complete misinterpretation of the figures (as SP has shown above) and that the only way that any correlation between CO2 and temperatures has been achieved (even roughly) is by fiddling the figures on a fairly large scale. And it is quite important because, if the West is going to bankrupt its economies by eliminating CO2 emissions it would be a pity if it made absolutely no difference - which is actually what the REAL data indicates. So the fiddling of the figures is very relevant. IMO the real killer fact is that the data is being filtered by processing through the climate models. In other words data that doesn't fit the theory is deleted. It's absolutely classic. It seems bumburgh has lost her bottle....
Greta Thunberg pulls out of Edinburgh Book Festival, accusing event sponsors of greenwashing.
In a statement released through the festival, Ms Thunberg said she was “unfortunately unable to attend”.
“As a climate activist I cannot attend an event which receives sponsorship from Baillie Gifford, who invest heavily in the fossil fuel industry,” she went on.
“Greenwashing efforts by the fossil fuel industry, including sponsorship of cultural events, allow them to keep the social licence to continue operating.
“I cannot and do not want to be associated with events that accept this kind of sponsorship.”
The investment firm, however, denies investing “heavily” in oil and gas, claiming just 2 per cent of its clients’ money is in the sector.
Nick Barley, the director of the book festival, said he was “disappointed” with Ms Thunberg’s decision, but that he “fully respects” it.
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Aug 4, 2023 16:20:45 GMT
Just another rehash of isolated incidents. AGW can't be happening because someone fudged the figures in a document 7 years ago etc. I expect the ocean temperatures currently being recorded are wrong because of that fudged information. I bet the ice caps are not melting because someone lied in 1990. And the glaciers will stop receding once we realise they lied to us. You seem to be unable to understand what the argument is about, zany, despite being reminded regularly. Let's try again. The argument is NOT that the climate is not changing - it changes all the time by either sudden events or gradually. The argument is about the causes of the current period of warming. You and the climate lobby are claiming that the primary cause of temperature rise is man-made CO2 - and you claim that 97% of scientists back this claim. The trouble is that the 97% claim is a complete misinterpretation of the figures (as SP has shown above) and that the only way that any correlation between CO2 and temperatures has been achieved (even roughly) is by fiddling the figures on a fairly large scale. And it is quite important because, if the West is going to bankrupt its economies by eliminating CO2 emissions it would be a pity if it made absolutely no difference - which is actually what the REAL data indicates. So the fiddling of the figures is very relevant. IMO the real killer fact is that the data is being filtered by processing through the climate models. In other words data that doesn't fit the theory is deleted. It's absolutely classic. No, your arguing that because some few adulterated some figures we can pretend that means the climate is either not changing or that those changes are natural. Neither of those claims are made true by the fact a couple of scientists lied about some data. The climate IS getting warmer, the Glaciers ARE receding and the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be. Co2 IS the primary cause of this. A few cheating scientists do not change these facts. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2023 17:25:57 GMT
You seem to be unable to understand what the argument is about, zany, despite being reminded regularly. Let's try again. The argument is NOT that the climate is not changing - it changes all the time by either sudden events or gradually. The argument is about the causes of the current period of warming. You and the climate lobby are claiming that the primary cause of temperature rise is man-made CO2 - and you claim that 97% of scientists back this claim. The trouble is that the 97% claim is a complete misinterpretation of the figures (as SP has shown above) and that the only way that any correlation between CO2 and temperatures has been achieved (even roughly) is by fiddling the figures on a fairly large scale. And it is quite important because, if the West is going to bankrupt its economies by eliminating CO2 emissions it would be a pity if it made absolutely no difference - which is actually what the REAL data indicates. So the fiddling of the figures is very relevant. IMO the real killer fact is that the data is being filtered by processing through the climate models. In other words data that doesn't fit the theory is deleted. It's absolutely classic. No, your arguing that because some few adulterated some figures we can pretend that means the climate is either not changing or that those changes are natural. Neither of those claims are made true by the fact a couple of scientists lied about some data. The climate IS getting warmer, the Glaciers ARE receding and the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be. Co2 IS the primary cause of this. A few cheating scientists do not change these facts. Indeed however other factors confuse the issue, the climate is becoming warmer but not at the speed predicted, the glaciers in general are retreating whilst a few are growing and the ocean surface currently is warmer than normal in a few places. A few cheating scientist do not change facts but what they do do is muddy the waters around facts so that the 'facts' become conjectural and more importantly the reason why they are the facts needs confirmation. We have had an increase in atmospheric moisture due to an underwater volcano recently to further muddy the waters as confirmed by NASA. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Aug 4, 2023 17:41:17 GMT
No, your arguing that because some few adulterated some figures we can pretend that means the climate is either not changing or that those changes are natural. Neither of those claims are made true by the fact a couple of scientists lied about some data. The climate IS getting warmer, the Glaciers ARE receding and the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be. Co2 IS the primary cause of this. A few cheating scientists do not change these facts. Indeed however other factors confuse the issue, the climate is becoming warmer but not at the speed predicted, the glaciers in general are retreating whilst a few are growing and the ocean surface currently is warmer than normal in a few places. A few cheating scientist do not change facts but what they do do is muddy the waters around facts so that the 'facts' become conjectural and more importantly the reason why they are the facts needs confirmation. We have had an increase in atmospheric moisture due to an underwater volcano recently to further muddy the waters as confirmed by NASA. How can you say "Indeed" and then dismiss every word? Nearly ALL glaciers are receding mentioning a couple that are not just muddies the water. AVERAGE ocean temperatures are 5 degrees warmer. that's AVERAGE. No, a scientist who lied ten years ago only allows you to pretend everything since can be dismissed as possibly untrue. It does not change the data NOW. Yes the Tonga event is unprecedented and will almost certainly effect weather for the next few years. But the stuff happening before the Tonga eruption still happened. The Glaciers were retreating before Tonga and will probably accelerate more from it. None of that changes the fact that AGW is happening whether a couple of scientists massaged some figures or not. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2023 18:16:12 GMT
You seem to be unable to understand what the argument is about, zany, despite being reminded regularly. Let's try again. The argument is NOT that the climate is not changing - it changes all the time by either sudden events or gradually. The argument is about the causes of the current period of warming. You and the climate lobby are claiming that the primary cause of temperature rise is man-made CO2 - and you claim that 97% of scientists back this claim. The trouble is that the 97% claim is a complete misinterpretation of the figures (as SP has shown above) and that the only way that any correlation between CO2 and temperatures has been achieved (even roughly) is by fiddling the figures on a fairly large scale. And it is quite important because, if the West is going to bankrupt its economies by eliminating CO2 emissions it would be a pity if it made absolutely no difference - which is actually what the REAL data indicates. So the fiddling of the figures is very relevant. IMO the real killer fact is that the data is being filtered by processing through the climate models. In other words data that doesn't fit the theory is deleted. It's absolutely classic. No, your arguing that because some few adulterated some figures we can pretend that means the climate is either not changing or that those changes are natural. Neither of those claims are made true by the fact a couple of scientists lied about some data. The climate IS getting warmer, the Glaciers ARE receding and the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be. Co2 IS the primary cause of this. A few cheating scientists do not change these facts. There's another interesting assertion. Because of the expansion of water with temperature, a 2C rise in the oceans would cause a sea level rise of 20cm and a 5C rise would therefore cause a sea level rise of 50cm or about 20 inches. No such sea level rise has been observed. You have been brainwashed by the cult, Zany. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Aug 4, 2023 19:36:33 GMT
No, your arguing that because some few adulterated some figures we can pretend that means the climate is either not changing or that those changes are natural. Neither of those claims are made true by the fact a couple of scientists lied about some data. The climate IS getting warmer, the Glaciers ARE receding and the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be. Co2 IS the primary cause of this. A few cheating scientists do not change these facts. There's another interesting assertion. Because of the expansion of water with temperature, a 2C rise in the oceans would cause a sea level rise of 20cm and a 5C rise would therefore cause a sea level rise of 50cm or about 20 inches. No such sea level rise has been observed. You have been brainwashed by the cult, Zany. Yes, I suppose if the whole ocean was 5 degrees warmer that might be the case, but its only the surface. Guess you need a brain for it to be washed. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2023 20:09:59 GMT
Indeed however other factors confuse the issue, the climate is becoming warmer but not at the speed predicted, the glaciers in general are retreating whilst a few are growing and the ocean surface currently is warmer than normal in a few places. A few cheating scientist do not change facts but what they do do is muddy the waters around facts so that the 'facts' become conjectural and more importantly the reason why they are the facts needs confirmation. We have had an increase in atmospheric moisture due to an underwater volcano recently to further muddy the waters as confirmed by NASA. How can you say "Indeed" and then dismiss every word? Nearly ALL glaciers are receding mentioning a couple that are not just muddies the water. AVERAGE ocean temperatures are 5 degrees warmer. that's AVERAGE. No, a scientist who lied ten years ago only allows you to pretend everything since can be dismissed as possibly untrue. It does not change the data NOW. Yes the Tonga event is unprecedented and will almost certainly effect weather for the next few years. But the stuff happening before the Tonga eruption still happened. The Glaciers were retreating before Tonga and will probably accelerate more from it. None of that changes the fact that AGW is happening whether a couple of scientists massaged some figures or not. I said most glaciers are retreating and some are growing that is a fact. Do you have a link for the ocean temperatures being 5C warmer than normal. I am not dismissing everything, I am questioning everything and finding that the answers do not gel with what is stated to be the case. I am pretending nothing. The data now is crunched frequently by others and the findings do not confirm the hypothesis that they are supposed to be confirming. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2023 20:11:20 GMT
There's another interesting assertion. Because of the expansion of water with temperature, a 2C rise in the oceans would cause a sea level rise of 20cm and a 5C rise would therefore cause a sea level rise of 50cm or about 20 inches. No such sea level rise has been observed. You have been brainwashed by the cult, Zany. Yes, I suppose if the whole ocean was 5 degrees warmer that might be the case, but its only the surface. Guess you need a brain for it to be washed. Apparently it is only the surface in some areas. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2023 20:32:05 GMT
Yes, I suppose if the whole ocean was 5 degrees warmer that might be the case, but its only the surface. Guess you need a brain for it to be washed. Apparently it is only the surface in some areas. Which is a long way from your assertion "the oceans ARE 5°C warmer than they should be." So you are backtracking. Guess you need a brain to use your words more carefully, or it is just another case of unsupported Zanywaffle. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2023 20:32:16 GMT
It seems not all predictions forecasting disasters hold up once more information is obtained. www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/996247"About 15 years ago, researchers reported that the timing of spring in high-Arctic Greenland had advanced at some of the fastest rates of change ever seen anywhere in the world. But, according to new evidence reported in the journal Current Biology on July 26, that earlier pattern has since been completely erased. Instead of coming earlier and earlier, it seems the timing of Arctic spring is now driven by tremendous climate variability with drastic differences from one year to the next. “As scientists we are obliged to revisit previous work to see whether the knowledge obtained at that time still holds,” says Niels Martin Schmidt (@nielsmschmidt) of Aarhus University in Denmark. “We looked at previously reported extreme rates of phenological advancements in the Arctic and found that directional advancement is no longer the prevailing pattern. Actually, the previously observed trend has disappeared completely and has been replaced by extreme year-to-year variation in the onset of spring.” Global changes in climate are expected to take place faster in the Arctic than in places at lower latitudes. To follow those trends, researchers at Zackenberg in Northeast Greenland launched an ecosystem-wide monitoring program in 1996. Among a suite of ecosystem variables, the program also tracks the timing of spring based on flowering plants, arthropod emergence, and bird nesting. When the first 10 years of data were analyzed for 1996–2005, the findings showed a clear pattern of advancement across plants and animals included in the study. For instance, they saw some arthropods emerging up to 4 weeks earlier. In the new study, Schmidt and his colleagues wanted to see how these trends look now that they have 15 additional years of data available. After analyzing the phenological data from 1996–2020, they report little evidence of directional change in the timing of events even as climate change continues. The researchers attribute this shift to a high degree of climate variability from year to year. |
|
