|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 3, 2024 14:21:47 GMT
The earlier link from the Daily Sceptic raised some issues but of critical importance is the record temperatures, quoted by many in JSO and other groups as definitive evidence of disaster around the corner. One paragraph stands out and indicates the nonsense and the inaccuracies that are being reported by our National Meteorological Organisation supposedly scientifically unchallengeable. I quote; "But explanations from the Met Office are thin on the ground. It continues to promote a 60 second spike to 40.3°C at RAF Coningsby at 3.12pm on July 19 in 2022 as a U.K. temperature record, despite the known presence of three typhoon jets attempting to land around the same time. The record has become a national joke, even more so after the Daily Sceptic revealed that Coningsby is a class 3 site with an ‘uncertainty’ of 1°C. All that can be said is that at least Coningsby replaced the previous class 5 record set at Cambridge Botanic Gardens in 2019." dailysceptic.org/2024/04/02/exclusive-met-office-uses-junk-temperature-measurements-to-fill-world-treasure-350-year-temperature-record/So the 'record' could be below 40 and is doubtfully free from corruption anyway from Jet engines and the old record could be 2.5 degrees lower than that stated. Basically no one knows what the readings are with any degree of accuracy but spurious accuracy is implied. |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Apr 5, 2024 10:00:12 GMT
I was born in 1957, and it was cold back then, with frost on the inside of windows. Now its toasty, about three or four years ago the winter temp here in the east hardly dropped at all, well into double figures. Is this normal or man made.? Regardless of what anyone says no one really knows. And i dont care, im old. The world thinks its man made hence net zero.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 5, 2024 10:55:38 GMT
We have heard it all before..  |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Apr 5, 2024 11:06:35 GMT
I was born in 1957, and it was cold back then, with frost on the inside of windows. Now its toasty, about three or four years ago the winter temp here in the east hardly dropped at all, well into double figures. Is this normal or man made.? Regardless of what anyone says no one really knows. And i dont care, im old. The world thinks its man made hence net zero. People say things like that but I am sceptical.
I have lived in the same house, in South London, since 2003. Whenever it snows, I take photos. From my photo albums I can see that we had snow in 20 of the last 21 years.
We've had snow in three Decembers, six Januaries, five Februaries, three Marches, two Aprils and one November.
And the South East has never been known for particularly frigid temperatures.
Global warming? Pah.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Apr 5, 2024 12:44:27 GMT
Do you know the difference between intelligence and stupidity?
A stupid person cherry picks data to confirm their stupidity.
Yes, you can find the odd example of scientifically questionable data, or the odd stray result, but if we look at the data as a whole there is no doubt the earth is warming up. Some of it is because we are coming out of an Ice Age. Some of it because of the cycles of the sun and the changes in our orbit around it. We can't do anything about those. What we can do is to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, stop polluting our rivers and oceans, and stop cutting down trees. All of these actions are making the temperature changes worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 5, 2024 13:00:56 GMT
Do you know the difference between intelligence and stupidity? A stupid person cherry picks data to confirm their stupidity. Yes, you can find the odd example of scientifically questionable data, or the odd stray result, but if we look at the data as a whole there is no doubt the earth is warming up. Some of it is because we are coming out of an Ice Age. Some of it because of the cycles of the sun and the changes in our orbit around it. We can't do anything about those. What we can do is to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, stop polluting our rivers and oceans, and stop cutting down trees. All of these actions are making the temperature changes worse. It is not the odd example of questionable data it is a whole host of information that feeds into the narrative. Remember no one is saying the earth is not warming what is being said and asked is that no one knows why the earth is warming and by how much. The 40.3 was hailed as a record temperature, was used in all the data input to the IPCC along with other dodgy information. That temperature was jumped on by JSO as evidence that GW was real, was happening and needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are many examples of suspect data most especially in the developed world, Australian sceptics have had to use the law to get data from their service and it is still being withheld. Stopping polluting is a laudable aim, calling CO2 a pollutant does not quite have the same resonance. We cannot save the world either through adopting net zero and/or inviting most of the world to come here. Possibly we could pretty soon elect a government that actually cares about the British people as its primary aim and adopting policies that benefit that group in the first instance. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Apr 5, 2024 13:22:44 GMT
Do you know the difference between intelligence and stupidity? A stupid person cherry picks data to confirm their stupidity. Yes, you can find the odd example of scientifically questionable data, or the odd stray result, but if we look at the data as a whole there is no doubt the earth is warming up. Some of it is because we are coming out of an Ice Age. Some of it because of the cycles of the sun and the changes in our orbit around it. We can't do anything about those. What we can do is to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, stop polluting our rivers and oceans, and stop cutting down trees. All of these actions are making the temperature changes worse. It is not the odd example of questionable data it is a whole host of information that feeds into the narrative. Remember no one is saying the earth is not warming what is being said and asked is that no one knows why the earth is warming and by how much. The 40.3 was hailed as a record temperature, was used in all the data input to the IPCC along with other dodgy information. That temperature was jumped on by JSO as evidence that GW was real, was happening and needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are many examples of suspect data most especially in the developed world, Australian sceptics have had to use the law to get data from their service and it is still being withheld. Stopping polluting is a laudable aim, calling CO2 a pollutant does not quite have the same resonance. We cannot save the world either through adopting net zero and/or inviting most of the world to come here. Possibly we could pretty soon elect a government that actually cares about the British people as its primary aim and adopting policies that benefit that group in the first instance. It seems no one can remember what the argument is about - for more than a few seconds. The argument is about the claims that the predominant cause of warming is man-made CO2 - when there is absolutely no evidence to prove that CO2 causes warming in the Earth's system. If the claim was that the predominant cause of warming (such as there is) is caused by the changes that man has made to the planet to support a near 8-fold increase in population (from 1 billion to 8 billion) I wouldn't be arguing. There's plenty of evidence to support that. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Apr 5, 2024 13:37:03 GMT
It is not the odd example of questionable data it is a whole host of information that feeds into the narrative. Remember no one is saying the earth is not warming what is being said and asked is that no one knows why the earth is warming and by how much. The 40.3 was hailed as a record temperature, was used in all the data input to the IPCC along with other dodgy information. That temperature was jumped on by JSO as evidence that GW was real, was happening and needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are many examples of suspect data most especially in the developed world, Australian sceptics have had to use the law to get data from their service and it is still being withheld. Stopping polluting is a laudable aim, calling CO2 a pollutant does not quite have the same resonance. We cannot save the world either through adopting net zero and/or inviting most of the world to come here. Possibly we could pretty soon elect a government that actually cares about the British people as its primary aim and adopting policies that benefit that group in the first instance. It seems no one can remember what the argument is about - for more than a few seconds. The argument is about the claims that the predominant cause of warming is man-made CO2 - when there is absolutely no evidence to prove that CO2 causes warming in the Earth's system. If the claim was that the predominant cause of warming (such as there is) is caused by the changes that man has made to the planet to support a near 8-fold increase in population (from 1 billion to 8 billion) I wouldn't be arguing. There's plenty of evidence to support that. They are talking about a rise in temperature outside of what would normally be expected. Since the Industrial Revolution the speed of change has increased... that is what they are referring to as man made. Personally, I don't care about Climate Change enough to change my lifestyle, but that doesn't mean I am going to deny the obvious either. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 5, 2024 18:14:47 GMT
It seems no one can remember what the argument is about - for more than a few seconds. The argument is about the claims that the predominant cause of warming is man-made CO2 - when there is absolutely no evidence to prove that CO2 causes warming in the Earth's system. If the claim was that the predominant cause of warming (such as there is) is caused by the changes that man has made to the planet to support a near 8-fold increase in population (from 1 billion to 8 billion) I wouldn't be arguing. There's plenty of evidence to support that. They are talking about a rise in temperature outside of what would normally be expected. Since the Industrial Revolution the speed of change has increased... that is what they are referring to as man made. Personally, I don't care about Climate Change enough to change my lifestyle, but that doesn't mean I am going to deny the obvious either. We do not know what normally would be expected as we have little or no information as regards what is 'normal'. Has the speed of change increased? The predictions are it will but in effect most predictions vis a vis global warming have been pretty abject failures but at the moment there is no acceleration as we have had a pause recently that was over 8 years long. The whole point is that you may be made to care by enforced change of lifestyle based on erroneous, and known erroneous at that, information. It will be in the name of saving the planet, it will be nothing of the sort. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 5, 2024 18:18:48 GMT
It is not the odd example of questionable data it is a whole host of information that feeds into the narrative. Remember no one is saying the earth is not warming what is being said and asked is that no one knows why the earth is warming and by how much. The 40.3 was hailed as a record temperature, was used in all the data input to the IPCC along with other dodgy information. That temperature was jumped on by JSO as evidence that GW was real, was happening and needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are many examples of suspect data most especially in the developed world, Australian sceptics have had to use the law to get data from their service and it is still being withheld. Stopping polluting is a laudable aim, calling CO2 a pollutant does not quite have the same resonance. We cannot save the world either through adopting net zero and/or inviting most of the world to come here. Possibly we could pretty soon elect a government that actually cares about the British people as its primary aim and adopting policies that benefit that group in the first instance. It seems no one can remember what the argument is about - for more than a few seconds. The argument is about the claims that the predominant cause of warming is man-made CO2 - when there is absolutely no evidence to prove that CO2 causes warming in the Earth's system. If the claim was that the predominant cause of warming (such as there is) is caused by the changes that man has made to the planet to support a near 8-fold increase in population (from 1 billion to 8 billion) I wouldn't be arguing. There's plenty of evidence to support that. I think they know well enough but calling it denial means that one has to repeat that one does not deny Global warming. All that one does is raise points as regards 'the science' which are at best spurious and often can easily be seen to be lies and because they are lies that raises the question as to why they are lies. For our own good, or for someone else's? |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Apr 6, 2024 10:00:12 GMT
In Roman times vineyards were in Britain, and as far north as Norway, there were hippos and crocs in the rivers and lakes.
Norfolk has vineyards. Man survived. Laughed at that one squeezed middle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2024 10:29:26 GMT
In Roman times vineyards were in Britain, and as far north as Norway, there were hippos and crocs in the rivers and lakes. Norfolk has vineyards. Man survived. Laughed at that one squeezed middle. The were hippos and crocs in Norwegian rivers and lakes in Roman times? Are you sure about that? lol |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 6, 2024 11:30:05 GMT
I was born in 1957, and it was cold back then, with frost on the inside of windows. Now its toasty, about three or four years ago the winter temp here in the east hardly dropped at all, well into double figures. Is this normal or man made.? Regardless of what anyone says no one really knows. And i dont care, im old. The world thinks its man made hence net zero. People say things like that but I am sceptical.
I have lived in the same house, in South London, since 2003. Whenever it snows, I take photos. From my photo albums I can see that we had snow in 20 of the last 21 years.
We've had snow in three Decembers, six Januaries, five Februaries, three Marches, two Aprils and one November.
And the South East has never been known for particularly frigid temperatures.
Global warming? Pah.
Living less than 100 yards from the second highest tidal range on the planet, tidal flooding is my pet hate. Every ten minutes some tofu noshing nerd in a lycra cyclesuit and a man bun preaches that we have a climate emergency but the highest tide and storm surge so far this century, which hit last fortnight, was nowhere near the 1997 riverbank breach and didn’t get within two metres of the 1930 inundation |
|
|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 7, 2024 21:51:06 GMT
What we can do is to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere Well, we could physically do that. Unfortunately it has proved to be politically impossible. The sad truth is that we aren't going to even limit climate change by very much, let alone stop it. Almost nobody is talking seriously about leaving economically viable fossil fuel in the ground forever. If we were going to do that, we needed to stop exploratory drilling 20 years ago. And the truth is also that even if one country stopped it, most of the others wouldn't, and there's also nothing to prevent a country that has stopped it from starting again. I am not saying we shouldn't do anything. I am saying we need to prepare for several degrees of climate change, which means nothing less than the end of the world as we have known it. The real debate about the future hasn't even started yet. |
|
|
|
Post by anthropoz on Apr 7, 2024 21:58:06 GMT
It is not the odd example of questionable data it is a whole host of information that feeds into the narrative. Remember no one is saying the earth is not warming what is being said and asked is that no one knows why the earth is warming and by how much. The 40.3 was hailed as a record temperature, was used in all the data input to the IPCC along with other dodgy information. That temperature was jumped on by JSO as evidence that GW was real, was happening and needed to be addressed as a matter of urgency. There are many examples of suspect data most especially in the developed world, Australian sceptics have had to use the law to get data from their service and it is still being withheld. Stopping polluting is a laudable aim, calling CO2 a pollutant does not quite have the same resonance. We cannot save the world either through adopting net zero and/or inviting most of the world to come here. Possibly we could pretty soon elect a government that actually cares about the British people as its primary aim and adopting policies that benefit that group in the first instance. It seems no one can remember what the argument is about - for more than a few seconds. The argument is about the claims that the predominant cause of warming is man-made CO2 - when there is absolutely no evidence to prove that CO2 causes warming in the Earth's system. If the claim was that the predominant cause of warming (such as there is) is caused by the changes that man has made to the planet to support a near 8-fold increase in population (from 1 billion to 8 billion) I wouldn't be arguing. There's plenty of evidence to support that. There really isn't any scientific question about this at all. The science that shows that most of the current warming is caused by CO2 is every bit as secure as the science that shows amphibians evolved from fish or that venus rotates backwards. In other words, there is no genuine debate about this topic within the relevant part of the scientific community. There are all sorts of other questions, especially about why climatologists have apparently underestimated the rate of warming, but no question at all that there is a direct causal link between CO2 emissions and global warming. Yes, there are also other factors in play, and yes you may well argue that overpopulation is an even more fundamental problem than climate change. However, overpopulation is a problem that is likely to rectify itself eventually. There won't be 8 billion humans left after 4 degrees of warming. |
|
