Global warming not going away

[Hawkamania!]

So the near-unanimous opinion of working climate scientists on this issue is wrong then, and you're right?

Proof please?

 

[morgoth]

So the near-unanimous opinion of working climate scientists on this issue is wrong then, and you're right?

Please provide a link to your scientists. IPCC has been found to be a small population of scientists, lots since discredited.

But the biggest problem is people going outside and feeling the cold. I know you tried to switch to climate change from global warming but it has not worked and people just think it is a joke these days.

All you hear in coffee shops, at work is people ridiculing it.

 

[cat on acid]

Please provide a link to your scientists. IPCC has been found to be a small population of scientists, lots since discredited.

But the biggest problem is people going outside and feeling the cold. I know you tried to switch to climate change from global warming but it has not worked and people just think it is a joke these days.

All you hear in coffee shops, at work is people ridiculing it.

That's the problem, people only read the papers and watch the news. There's more information on astrology than science in some. If people took the time and read any scientific journal the majority of papers consider the real possibility/occurence of AGW. How can they ridicule it if they know nothing about it?

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Please provide a link to your scientists. IPCC has been found to be a small population of scientists, lots since discredited.

But the biggest problem is people going outside and feeling the cold. I know you tried to switch to climate change from global warming but it has not worked and people just think it is a joke these days.

All you hear in coffee shops, at work is people ridiculing it.

Id be interested to hear the morgoth opinion on whether the earth is warming and if man has anything to do with it. (And if so, should he do anything about it)

 

[Bodicifer]

I'm a massive supporter of global warming. Have any of you been outside in Melbourne and Sydney over the past few days? Far out, bring on global warming I say. My apricots are stuck in my throat. I'm off to go burn some tyres now and try and warm up a bit. Brrrrrrrr

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I'm a massive supporter of global warming. Have any of you been outside in Melbourne and Sydney over the past few days? Far out, bring on global warming I say. My apricots are stuck in my throat. I'm off to go burn some tyres now and try and warm up a bit. Brrrrrrrr

I'm thinking that my neighbour across the street ( on the downhill side ) has a driveway that will make a nice boat ramp.

 

[Bodicifer]

Originally Posted by Bodicifer
I'm a massive supporter of global warming. Have any of you been outside in Melbourne and Sydney over the past few days? Far out, bring on global warming I say. My apricots are stuck in my throat. I'm off to go burn some tyres now and try and warm up a bit. Brrrrrrrr

I'm thinking that my neighbour across the street ( on the downhill side ) has a driveway that will make a nice boat ramp.

LOL...sweet, I've got a boat so hook me up when those water levels rise will you and I'll take you out on the snapper!!! Al Gore has certainly put the fear of drowning in people...drowning in bull sh*t !!!

 

[Doctor Jolly]

The right wing government of NZ has just introduced an ETS.

I havent put much effort into looking at the details, but it sounds very similar to the one Turnbull negotiated, with big subsidies to big poluters.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The right wing government of NZ has just introduced an ETS.

I havent put much effort into looking at the details, but it sounds very similar to the one Turnbull negotiated, with big subsidies to big poluters.

There is a reasoning to this sort of thing though.
Take Aluminium smelting for example, it typically uses electric furnaces and uses a lot of energy. Now you can tax the crap out of them with a ETS.
It won't make people use less Aluminium. It won't make Aluminium more expensive. It will make the local operation less viable than the ones overseas.
Moving industries offshore isn't going to help the environment at all. ( Maybe you could move them offplanet! )

In fact some overseas countries will be producing more pollution than the equivalents in Australia, to produce the same
goods.

Its much better to work with these industries to try to find new ways to minimise their impact.

 

[tandino]

How about we build a big chimney...

 

[Doctor Jolly]

THE world is "unequivocally" getter hotter and has been for more than 30 years,

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...getting-hotter-says-study-20100729-10weq.html


This, coming on the back of the complete clearing of any misleading information coming out of the "climate-gate" emails.

We really are in deep sh1t, because globally CO2 emissions have flattened over the past 3 years due to the GFC's downturn on industry, and yet the planet keeps warming.

Just imagine how much of a cut we'll have to make to actually stop the warming, and how long the lag would be.

 

[Relativity]

THE world is "unequivocally" getter hotter and has been for more than 30 years,

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...getting-hotter-says-study-20100729-10weq.html


This, coming on the back of the complete clearing of any misleading information coming out of the "climate-gate" emails.

We really are in deep sh1t, because globally CO2 emissions have flattened over the past 3 years due to the GFC's downturn on industry, and yet the planet keeps warming.

Just imagine how much of a cut we'll have to make to actually stop the warming, and how long the lag would be.

Maybe, just maybe CO2 emissions aren't the prime cause of global warming.

 

[HarryTiger]

Maybe, just maybe CO2 emissions aren't the prime cause of global warming.

No 3 year stretch is significant to the argument but still, as you picked it, amazing the logical thought process displayed there. It's like Obi Wan, his death only makes him stronger.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Seems to me these last two posts weren't very significant to the argument either...

 

[Hawkamania!]

The Met office hasn't been successful with seasonal predictions let alone to be trusted on long term climate predictions.

Joe Bastardi from AccuWeather chimes in.

http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp?partner=accuweather

WANNA WARM THE EARTH? FUDGE THE POLAR DATA

Check this out. I don't know if I want to laugh, or cry, at how they get away with this (the people claiming warmest ever).
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/28/giss-polar-interpolation/#more-22648

Amazing how these folks (who shall remain nameless) get away with this.

TUESDAY NOON

MORE LIGHT ON THE GLOBAL TEMPS

I mean that... the more YOU can look at actual data, the better for all of us. I use this site to keep not only Europeans informed on other sources of info, but as I have found out, the entire globe! It has led to some viscous attacks on me from those not wishing to have all this information out. In any case, take a look at this:

ACTUAL SATELLITE DATA LINK SO THERE IS NO MISTAKE ON TEMPS!

Given the issuances that this is the warmest year ever, we can easily see by comparing the actual temps of 1998 to this year that this is not true.
Here is the link for all the OBJECTIVE satellite temps since we started this method, which of course is more objective than adjusted temps from pre-satellite eras. You can look for yourself.

http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt

Go back to the the year 1998 and stack the temps up against 2010.

Remember, in the history of the planet, the NON-BIASED measurement of temps can be compared to you starting to weigh yourself every day... a week ago. That you get up every morning and one morning find yourself 1/10th of a pound heavier is not a big deal. What's more, the reports on the warmest ever are like weighing yourself on your bathroom scale and seeing one thing, then going over and weighing yourself in the gym and seeing the other. The satellite era temps are the doctor's office (even more accurate... wrestler's) scale way of measuring and cannot be confused with the bathroom scale, which not only is not as accurate but can be adjusted up and down, depending on what the user is up to!

I'm still waiting for an answer on this:

So the near-unanimous opinion of working climate scientists on this issue is wrong then, and you're right?

Proof please?

 

[medusala]

The Met office hasn't been successful with seasonal predictions let alone to be trusted on long term climate predictions.

Interestingly also from your WUWT link (all misquoted?)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/25/seven-eminent-physicists-that-are-skeptical-of-agw/

Seven Eminent Physicists; Freeman Dyson, Ivar Giaever (Nobel Prize), Robert Laughlin (Nobel Prize), Edward Teller, Frederick Seitz, Robert Jastrow and William Nierenberg all skeptical of “man-made” global warming (AGW) alarm

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Seems to me that most of these scientists choose a side and then proceed to prove/discredit it depending what they have chosen.

Hardly the quest for knowlege that you would hope for.

Global warming seems to be winning because it is the "popular truth" and has more people trying to prove it than discredit it.

 

[HarryTiger]

Seems to me these last two posts weren't very significant to the argument either...

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Maybe, just maybe CO2 emissions aren't the prime cause of global warming.

No, the point is that we are still pumping a gazillion kg of Co2 in the atmosphere, and reductions of the touted 5% is still producing 95% of a gazillion, and therefore only slightly delaying things. Slightly.

What it shows is that the massive cuts proposed by the green fringe may be closer to whats required.

 

[ralphmalph]

I'm still waiting for an answer on this:

I had a spare 5 minutes and this is what I found:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Interestingly also from your WUWT link (all misquoted?)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/25/seven-eminent-physicists-that-are-skeptical-of-agw/

watts up with that dot com, eh?

That domain name just reeks credibility.
I bet they brought it a crazydomains.com after seeing the Pammy ad.

 

[medusala]

watts up with that dot com, eh?

DJ you can find the link re those physicists (including 2 nobel prize winners) elsewhere.

It was not originated on that site.

 

[Hawkamania!]

I had a spare 5 minutes and this is what I found:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf

If you had five minutes more, you could have gone back in this thread and seen that these reports have already been dealt with.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18164782&postcount=133

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18166479&postcount=143

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18198550&postcount=146

Those papers have been panned thoroughly by all except the most rabid supporters of the ipcc crusade.

 

[Grin]

Seems to me that most of these scientists choose a side and then proceed to prove/discredit it depending what they have chosen.

Hardly the quest for knowlege that you would hope for.

Global warming seems to be winning because it is the "popular truth" and has more people trying to prove it than discredit it.

No.

The gap between the understanding of this issue in scientific community and the public is very wide, largely by the doubt sewn by many of the same people, using the same tactics as were used to cast doubt on the harms of tobacco.

Most scientists understand that heat absorbing molecules absorb heat.
They also tend to understand that our oceans act as sinks, not just for heat but also for carbon, causing increased acidity.

 

[Hawkamania!]

The gap between the understanding of this issue in scientific community and the public is very wide, largely by the doubt sewn by many of the same people, using the same tactics as were used to cast doubt on the harms of tobacco.

Yes, the likes of al gore and his compatriots learnt well from the tobacco industry.

Most scientists understand that heat absorbing molecules absorb heat.
They also tend to understand that our oceans act as sinks, not just for heat but also for carbon, causing increased acidity.

The molecules that absorb heat also release heat. Water vapour is the most dominate greenhouse gas on our planet.

The oceans play a big part in the Earth's carbon cycle. The acidity scare in relation to CO2 is dubious at best but that's never stopped the Merchants of F.U.D. from trying to scare us into accepting carbon dioxide trading/taxation.