Antarctica logs highest temperature on record of 18.3C

Faulty thermometers.

possibly , could be even warmer then

Possible new holiday destination ? Let's face it Benidorm ain't what it used to be

Would this be climate or weather?
The climate alarmists have told us in the past to distinguish between the two (when it suited them).

possibly weather caused by climate

I think I'll turn the heating down just in case it's man made warming.

Oh hang on, it's only 73F in here anyway so there's no need.

What's that in the other - 22.77 C I think.

Or perhaps weather possibly caused by climate?

Foinavon - I wouldn't believe climate changers/weather forecasters if one of them walked into a room soaking wet and said it were raining outside, without checking for myself.

Hello said it 19 degrees in Norway and yet the photo shows frost and snow laying on the ground-so pinch of salt job.

library pictures terry

it won't feel like 19c besides ...when it was 18c here the other december it was  just a very mild dampish day  ...low sun angle and too much moisture in the air /ground  and under a blanket of low cloud   ...similar to what you get in the azores  where it's 18 in winter ...people there still wear coats

after Norway hitting 18 last week , must be  reason

There is.

Records go back about a second in 'epochal' terms

nothing to see here   ....

  that station in 'antarctica'  has reached over 17c on numerous occassions  so a bit of an alarmist story ....

If it’s getting warmer on Earth, can we assume that it’s also getting warmer in Hell

Well no Coach as someone was holding a thermometer showing the temp with said snow and frost.Me thinks billy bullsh1t is going down. Why believe people who will lie to us at a drop of a hat?

LOL Terry what planet do you live on?

Time and time again you have been shown that you constantly post lies , on many occasions your lies are either of a racist nature or libellous.
Now you expect people to believe you rather than the scientists because you claim they "tell lies at a drop of a hat"

Terry - stop posting lies.

Wonderful rainfall in NSW. Playing havoc with sporting fixtures.

If the ice cap melts the seas will rise. More water = more cooling. Ice age #2 will soon be upon us.

terry there are loads of ameutur weathermen with proper stevenson screens taking temps  and humidity etc all over the place  ...i think ONE of them atleast would have recognised a false reading  lol

more likely a short lasting rise from a fohn effect albeit an extreme one  , sometimes seen in northern Scotland

Are they doing beach holidays?

for every centimetre sea level rises around 5 million people could be displaced

Dr C, I gave my view on scientific facts some time ago on another thread. This was in the context of relatively "simple" concepts such as gravity and combustion.
When it comes to complex and chaotic systems the accuracy one can assign to forecasts is reduced for the short term and virtually unreliable over a longer timescale. So if a forecaster in a wet anorak tells me it's raining now I would be inclined to believe him but would give far less credit to his prediction for a week next Wednesday and none at all to what he thinks will be the case in 2050.

for every centimetre sea level rises around 5 million people could be displaced

Could? Will they or won't they?

in saying that tho would you agree world wide events of recent years show a pattern of increase regarding temps and intense weather patterns ?

Yes, I accept the findings that there has been a slight warming over the past decades. Climate changes all the time, we know that from geological records.

then if trend continues the consequences are not good for planet

im not so worried about what or who is cause , i just feel there is more than enough evidence now to warrant action to try combat changes

What makes you think that any action we take will affect climate change? The proposal to reduce carbon emissions is not guaranteed to change anything, are we not tilting at the symptoms rather than at the cause? Has the cause been determined with any degree of certainty?

What is certain is that human populations are far more vulnerable to climate change than they were when I was born and if the trend continues even small changes will be catastrophic when with sensible planning they wouldn't need to be. Humans aren't sensible though, that is the tragedy.

The cause of the observers global rise in temperatures has been identified to a degree of certainty Foinavon.


The chemical composition of the atmosphere has been measured for years at many different places on the planet. The atmosphere is changing.

The theory that certain gases lead to a warming of the planet is well established (it is well over a century old).

And of course nobody but nobody has come up with an alternative cause- maybe an Astroid hit Earth a few years ago, volcanic activity has increased recently? , the Earth has moved nearer to the Sun? The tilt of the Earth has changed? The continent ps have moved significantly in the past 200 years? All of those (& other) are natural causes which may effect the temperature of Earth . They have in the past & may well do in the future.

i think we can safely say our actions could be accelerating it

would be stupidity to stay on our current path regarding deforestation and burning fossil fuels , just makes no sense not to at least try

if only for the sake of nature at very least

Yep hello.

There are other advantages from driving electric cars, not burning coal etc. The air we breathe will be cleaner. There should be fewer deaths caused by poor air quality.

I'm aware that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas Mexico and that it's concentration in air is very low but so are other gases. Dynamic systems with positive and negative feedback usually reach a new equilibrium when subject to change. We know that the earth has been much warmer and colder than it is now, these oscillations seem to be normal. What makes you think that stopping emitting carbon dioxide now will prevent the system finding a new equilibrium significantly higher that it is now? We have to be prepared for change and we are not at this point in time. Exponential population growth continues and no steps are in place to prevent it continuing. What small room for manoeuvre we have is diminishing all the time.

I am in favour of cleaner air in cities. Electric cars just move the pollution elsewhere. We don't have the spare generation and transmission capacity to change rapidly to electric and renewables are unlikely to fill the gap which will occur especially if we decommission existing fossil fuel plants.

Re EVs, Most of the investment is going into nickel based batteries. They also use copper.

HUGE amounts of copper and nickel will have to be mined. Between 25-50kg of nickel can be needed for ONE CAR BATTERY. Has anyone calculated the carbon footprint of such mining?

Hydrogen powered vehicles a long way off.

The theory that certain gases lead to a warming of the planet is well established (it is well over a century old).

Granted mexico and I respect that.

But it's still only theory, and the countries that produce the most emissions are not buying it.

If the uk heats up sufficiently to grow exotic fruit it will stop the need to import. Thus reducing carbon emissions.

EVERYTHING mex

That's true Injera. Neither cement nor iron can be produced without emitting large quantities of carbon dioxide, it's basic chemistry. Both are needed in vast quantities to build and anchor giant windmills in the ground especially in the seabed. They will have to operate for a very long time before they become carbon neutral.
We will also need back up capacity for when there is insufficient wind. What will that be?
Hydrogen has a much lower energy density than octane and is much more difficult to store and potentially more dangerous.

Injera
That might be true , the use of air con in summer may increase.

There is some speculation (nothing certain) that UK may actually get colder winters as the planet warms, in winter UK gets a lot of energy from ocean currents bringing warm water from Gulf of Mexico. If this changes we may end up with warmer summers & colder winters.

UK is going to be OK if temp rises 2C , it is rising sea levels which will be an issue. Plus what does UK do is 100m from India, Bangladesh need to move home . Would UK take a few million or guard borders.
Still the real problems won't hit for a few decades. The young (under 25)  have a different attitude to the subject compared to the Baby Boomers. The electoral makeup will be different in 20 years time.

Feb 8, 2020 -- 12:46PM, Foinavon wrote:

I am in favour of cleaner air in cities. Electric cars just move the pollution elsewhere. We don't have the spare generation and transmission capacity to change rapidly to electric and renewables are unlikely to fill the gap which will occur especially if we decommission existing fossil fuel plants.

This is why when Greta says We need to go zero fossil fuels instead of carbon neutral, we know she is bullshetting. I don't understand why people can't call hr out, even when she has got things this wrong.

Not to mention decommissioning ICEs. Presumably we’ll dump them in Africa.

The electoral makeup will be different in 20 years time.

No it won't.

Today's wide eyed and helpless kids will be mature people in 20 years. With mature views and not so easily fooled with experience of life do draw on, they are tomorrow's sceptics.

If/when sea level rise displaces populations from low-lying areas such as Bangladesh and other river deltas the question is more likely to be will Russia and Canada be prepared to house half a billion refugees? Some land loss in lowland areas should be compensated for at least partially by increased fertility of upland and temperate regions and most of those are in the North.

In 20 years time we may be able to see the situation more clearly. On the other hand, the carbon dioxide/ climate change theory became fashionable 30 years ago and not much has changed since then even though we were promised Armageddon by the year 2000.

^  Catalytic Converters

in 30 years people don't just stand around waiting for things to happen

Catalytic converters don't reduce carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles, they increase them.

we wont be happy till every tree is cut down

each tree can remove 3 tonnes of carbon from atmosphere in its lifetime

we clear the trees for palm oil and farming , both cause carcinogenic problems


so we are speeding up climate to create unhealthy foods that will ultimately kill us , go figure

Foinavon

We were not promised Armageddon by year 2000 (nice link to the story)

For years scientists been saying keep warming to under 2C (now 1.5C being talked about).
Nobody predicted 30 years ago that we would reach that 2C by 2000 (I.e. Within 10 years).



I find it very difficult to believe Russia will just allow tens/hundreds of millions from Bangladesh to move in. Pressure will be on UK (&Europe, USA, Canada, Oz etc. ) to help out.
This is probably still many decades away & still a good chance can be prevented.

The countries that are at risk of losing their land mass, such as Bangladesh, are not bothered. hth.

I suspect thay are a tad bothered. Might not have a lot of money to do much about it.

In the West we could spend £100bn over 20 years on flood defences for cities (& let countryside flood). Can't really do that in Bangladesh.

I meant I don't really see Greta and the gang either preaching in Bangladesh or asking us for money to help them(if as you say their resources are the issue).

I see.

We do give overseas aid. Guess this could change in future to include flood defences.

I don't really know much about Greta- I suspect the argument is that if CO2 is reduced then Bangladesh won't suffer too much & will still be fine to live there (maybe with done better defences)

You really need to know more about Greta if you want to find out why people think the current wave of climate change enthusiasm is being considered a scam. She's the one who wants us to go zero fossil fuels TODAY but travels on trains complaining about not getting a seat(that train wouldn't be running if it weren't for fossil fuels).

Good luck to her but she is just a child.

She is has very little power , she is popular & going an incredible job of getting her message across.  That is about it. Her message is based on what others are saying.

So what , who cares if she says zero fossil fuels- If we reduce by 80% that will help.

Rodney: You see, it's fossil fuels! People do not realise the damage they're doing to this planet.

Trigger: I don't have none of them in my house, I use gas and oil.

Rodney: Trig, they are fossil fuels!

Trigger: Are they? Well, I'll switch to coal in future!

I used to work in the chemical industry, Mexico. In the early 1990s we were called into a meeting and presented with a load of propaganda and the hockey stick graph then told we had to make changes to avoid runaway global warming. It was the prelude to a big development programme as our global customers were coming under legislative pressure to change from solvent based to water based products. Armageddon didn't happen, perhaps we were more successful than we imagined. Nothing like frightening the children if you want something done.

Europe is full already, where would we put hundreds of millions of migrants? The only relatively open spaces are central and northern Asia and North America. We know what the answer will be, Putin is no pushover.

Foinavon

There isn't any recent evidence to suggest Western European leaders believe that "Europe is full".
Germany recently allowed in a million + people.

Not seen any evidence that 100m people in need of somewhere to live will go to Russia rather than UK/Europe (&USA, Canada etc)

I can hardly be expected to comment on the coperate strategy of one chemical company who changed their strategy 30 years ago. If they told you that life as we know it would be over in 10 years, then I suggest you were lied to by your company. However I suspect they gave a load of waffle management speak & did what they viewed was the best way to make a profit.

Life won't end in 2030 even if we basically just carry on pollution in the same way we currently are. There lies half the problem- why do anything now went we won't see any benefit for years. UK runs on 4-5 year election cycles, global warming is more about next 20,50,100 years.

A few million is a different proposition to the population of Bangladesh.

Yes, we in our corporate microcosm were subjected to hyperbole should I say (lie is such a nasty little word) and I think we (the populations of industrialised nations) are being similarly stuffed.
Most of us adults will be dead in 50 years time, some of us in 20, so the imperative isn't quite there yet.

By the way, it wasn't just one company even though it was a very large multinational, it was industry-wide. You had to reformulate or lose your market share. Some did lose out.

I think that is the point the young are trying to make.

The over 50s have far more votes than the under 25s , yet basically they won't be effected by global warming (plus U25 believe 50+ to be responsible for the position we are in)

The electerate is changing but there is a lot of power/money in the Oil, coal, motor industry, chemical industries etc. They all have top lawyers & contacts in various governments. The young don't have that power- they can skip school, close roads , protest etc. But won't win elections.

They believe it will happen, that is go through a tipping point, I don't.
The most important issue is runaway population increase and subsequent lack of resources especially clean water, or in some cases, any water at all. Nothing is being done about it and to do so would upset too many sensibilities, so it won't happen but more wars will be the inevitable outcome.

OVERTHROW THE CAPITALIST GREED AND TAKE BACK CONTROL

SMASH THE MIDDLE

you may not be far from truth peck

in years ahead i can see civil clashes between industry and new earthers , will also solve a bit of population crisis