Global Warming.

Global warming is predicted to make British winters more severe.
You are feeling it now.

Its called climate change nowadays. They had to change it because its not getting hotter.

Globally it is getting hotter.
Just not here in winter.
We will experience destabilisation, the loss of our under-appreciated temperate climate.

half an inch of snow and out come the flat-earthers.

sigh.

Its only a bit of fun ..... you OK with that ... this Global Warming nonsense came in about 4 years ago with the experts nobody on this Earth had evey heard of Globl Warming . 4 years ago ....... its zero 5 here . experts my ar......
when it goes tits up the experts are hard to find ..........

burying head in the sand (or snow?), ignorant people who dont realise ;-)

Bit like the Experts on ATR And RUK ... over to you Zoe ....... dont forget big mac ........zzzzzzzz

Partidge ... If you got owt to say ......... say it ....
In zipper land ........... a spade is a spade ........

Partridge ......... You have had 1 hour to respond ....... Zips got you down as a Whimp .... and I would bet long odds on That .........

Politically correct green house gas global warming theorists can never be wrong can they? Like one of the true disciples who contributed earlier in the thread he suggests global warming is all about cooler winters. My question has got to be this, how can this theory be proven wrong? when there's cooler winters thats global warming and when its hot thats global warming. The new religion which is global warming, supposedly caused by green house gases, asks its followers to believe whatever the present climate conditions.

Spot on. Global warming exists to make a bunch of people very rich and the people who believe in it so strongly are worse than the lamest bible loving religious types

Some very ignorant posts on here.
Do you really think you can calculate the average temperature of the Earth by watching weather forecasts on TV?

Moon light seems to exist on the level of personal abuse not on reasoned argument.


During the years 1940-1970 the earth cooled down, did mechanisation stop during thoses years?

Moon light seems to exist on the level of personal abuse not on reasoned argument.

Do the previous two posts seem to you to be reasoned argument? They seem a bit ad hominem to me. Especially as I despise political correctness completely and am quite miffed that anyone would accuse me of it. I see myself as a free thinker.

I don't believe anyone on here understands the real scientific debate re global warming. To me the issue seems to boil down to which group of scientists are most likely to have gone** the ones being quite openly paid by the oil companies or the hotch-potch of Univ and Govt scientists who think that man-made global warming is now well-established. (NB by data collected in the last 5 years.)
This is not a hard call to make. The motives of the cheerleaders for Denial are transparent, and the cast of characters familiar: The Daily Express for instance.
When did that rag become a science journal? They are disgusting creatures.

Do you really think you can calculate the average temperature of the Earth by watching weather forecasts on TV?

But you can tell what the climate will be in 2050?
And what it was like 20,000 years before?
And how much everyone has to reduce of that evil stuff called CO2 to force the climate not to level up, not to hit certain degrees?
And that there's anyone out there who could explain how this super complex and highly dynamic system that is the climate - outreaching the earth's atmosphere by far - works?
And that the impact of the sun is far less than of what gets emitted on earth?
And that mankind basically has the power to predict and to lead the acting of the universe in certain directions?
And so fecking on?

Those who believe in all that boll0x talk and propaganda need medical help. What has been untarnished by the hacked ICPP documents leaves no room for interpretation and is conformation of what everyone should have been doubting anyway. Now as they were already forced to turn "global warming" into "climate change" (as if there was a time when climate didn't change), one has to wonder what their next level of verbal evasiveness will sound like and how long it will be till plebs and sheep finally wake up.

The ones who need medical help are the ones who believe what they read in the Express.

Estimating the average global temperature is on the limit of what is scientifically feasible at this time, using a global network of ground stations and space satellites.
It cannot be done by selectively watching TV weather reports and grumbling about your taxes.

The ones who need medical help are the ones who believe what they read in the Express.

It cannot be done by selectively watching TV weather reports and grumbling about your taxes.


Entirely agree with THAT. Yet it doesn't say anything about how the climate is going to (re)act even in the next year nor can any model. It's enough to know that climate is a nonlinear, dynamic, open and chaotic system to understand that it can't be understood/calculated.

You've just laid off a lot of mathematicians and scientists who've spent the last twenty years developing the methods to study those types of systems.

In any case, because weather is chaotic does not mean average temperature is chaotic, any more than you can say that the direction of flow of a river cannot be predicted because it is turbulent. You can't predict the precise path which will be followed by a float released on the river, but you can predict it will end up in the sea.

True, now have a guess at the time span you need to tell where it,s going.............

Or have you got a system after 30 results?

Eh.. rivers flow downhill into the sea with remarkable consistency.

Surely, there are and will be times when climate will be stable over a period or show a trend, but, different from the river, you can't say what directions it's going to take in the long run or how to draw the big picture. It's utterly pretentious (to say the least) to try to explain a system like that and to make predictions of its acting for the year 2050 when we even fail to explain some very, very less complex things on earth.

On a related note, how come the same 'scientists' that predicted a little ice age just ten years ago (something that looks like a real trend the climate is going to take at the moment, considering a slight cooling over the last decade) keep blowing the horn of global warming these days with same confidence?

Paying more taxes won't affect climate change.

different from the river, you can't say what directions it's going to take in the long run or how to draw the big picture.
How do you know that? I can't predict it, but maybe the scientists can.

You say "the same scientists.." predicted a little Ice Age in the 1970's.
I suggest those scientists have since retired, and been replaced with a new lot, equipped with better computers.

So scientists are the new 'God' and must be believed at all times.

OOps, you say that it was ten years ago that they were preicting an Ice Age, I think it was a lot longer ago than that. I saw them on a TV documentary, and they looked very 70s-ish.

It's funny how many people are suddenly interested in science who didn't give a hoot till it threatened to affect their taxes.

The 70's weren't ten years ago. The scientists are still touring the media, just put a different record on. Makes you wonder why - surely not because of better models as known as programmes that work like they've been programmed.

No consensus to reach here. Your trust in scientists seems unflappable.

flatliner 06 Jan 02:40
True, now have a guess at the time span you need to tell where it,s going........


The weather

I don't trust blindly in scientists at all.
What on earth made you think I did?

All the melting ice at the Poles gives their claims a certain credibility.

And I don't trust at all in the scientists who are working for the oil companies. They will say whatever their masters pay them to.

The Right-wing press don't like Global Warming because it demolishes a political ideology they have spent a lifetime promoting, not because they have scientific doubts. They know nothing about science at all, and couldn't care less.

Nighty-night.

Moon Light what are your thoughts on the East Anglia uni email stuff?

East Anglia -not exactly a mainstream university. To think that a few emails between that bunch, could derail a global consensus, much of which is based on objective measurements, is a complete joke.

Regarding the current severe winter across the Northern hemisphere - 'one swallow doesn't make a summer'

The main problem with the 'climate change' issue is that there are too many experts with conflicting views!

If you have one expert, scientist or professor with one view you have another with completely the opposite, which makes it near on impossible for the normal Joe to have a clear understanding of the issue.

Google 'climate change' and you 'only' get a return of 66,000,000.... yet, despite the wealth of information and opinion what chance have we got to really understand it?

if the polar bears are running out of land in the Arctic, theres plenty for em round my way this morning.

Next they'll change the term 'Climate Change' to the words 'The four seasons'. Surely the only reason its cold in winter and warm in summer is because of greenhouse gases?

I haven't followed the E Anglia business, agree Grunweld.
The ordinary joe has no chance of understanding it, which is why we have professors and the like.
The cycle of seasons is caused by the tilt of the earth's axis, nothing to do with greenhouse gases.

East Anglia -not exactly a mainstream university. To think that a few emails between that bunch

Oh dear. You haven't got a clue what the CRU and IPCC are. The Climate Research Unit is the world's leading institute re climate studies, formerly directed by the now forced-to-resign Phil Jones who also was a leading member of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, providing most of the data that has forced the Kyoto Agreement and everything else. One of their main gimmicks, the hockey stick graph, has been proven wrong as it's been highly manipulated (known as Mike's trick to hide the decline).

You just have to go through the leaked emails to have it in black and white how data got rigged systematically, how critiques forcefully got kept out of peer reviews etc. Of course, that doesn't have to make you believe in everything what the sceptics say, but those emails leave no room for interpretation at all. A most interesting read and highly recommended.

I simply don't believe that a bit of co2 released by humans is going to affect the climate that much.

More importantly I don't believe that anyone, scientists included, can accurately predict how the earth's climate is going to change in the future. The system is too chaotic with a great number of important random factors which can affect the climate.

If I'm wrong then the best way to tackle it is through a program of population control to conserve vital resources and regenerate rain forests, etc. which absorb co2, rather than the tinkering at the edges that politicians are currently doing.

All the melting ice at the Poles gives their claims a certain credibility.



Moonlight you still haven't shown any credible evidence for this. you Say you saw it on a the News, but Wikipedia disagrees and you say the scientists have since admitted they got it wrong. You have provided no evidence for this.

Grunweld said.

Regarding the current severe winter across the Northern hemisphere - 'one swallow doesn't make a summer'



Yes I agree, but this is like the summer of 1976 only in reverse.May not be significant, but could be.We could have another 2 months of this and they are already saying it's the worse for 30 years. In 63 it didn't even get going until Feb.

Moonlight you still haven't shown any credible evidence for this

I've seen the Eskimos being interviewed on the telly, ffs
I don't index every thing I ever see so I can produce it as evidence afterward.

So why can't you find it on Google or Youtube?

It's not difficult to see that the oil companies are unhappy at the prospect of being targeted by taxation and have set measures in place to prevent it.
You can buy a lot of bs artists for the kind of money those people stand to lose unless they can kybosh Kyoto etc.
These people have been running the world for a century or more. Ask anyone from the MidEast. Check out that Iraq War. They have just looted the US Treasury on a fantastic scale and now they want to get rid of green taxes.
So they hire a few scunners to put some disinfo about. It's not very difficult. The Right-Wing press lap it up as it's what they want to believe, just like the ludicrous scam to smear George Galloway.

You are the one with the disinformation. I keep asking you for evidence for your assertions and all I get back is your political opinions. That's irrelevant.Put up or shut up.

So why can't you find it on Google or Youtube?
I haven't looked. I don't know why you can't find it.

One of the Eskimo interviews was broadcast a few weeks ago on a show about Stephen Fry in America. They were paddling about in their kayaks trying to catch a whale or somesuch. They said they were doing this earlier in the year than they used to, as the ice melted much earlier. I have seen several Eskimo interviews now, and have trouble telling them apart. There was also one with Ray Mears in Canada, and a few others.
Apparently the North-West Passage may soon be navigable for the first time since the Ice Age.
Enjoy.

The CRU already confirmed that the leaked emails and documents are for real. Why should they do it after years and years of propaganda? You either are on a massive wind-up or a blindly believing sheep far worse than the Express readers you were mocking.

http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php

There.

Who paid for that .com site?
Some people are very naive. There is money behind all this manipulation. Billions are at stake.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

You're the most naive person on here, moon light

Coming from someone who believes that winter and summer are caused by greenhouse gases.
Next he wants me to believe that oil companies don't care about there tax bills, they exist only to worship Pure Truth.

their tax bills, sorry.

In 1921 General Motors introduced tetraethyl lead into petrol even though scientists at the time stated that the compound was a neurotoxin. It took around 50 years to eliminate it!

its like putting an ice cube into a glass of water..itl slowly melt and the water will drop in temperature to meet it.thats whats happening with the ice caps..the earth is just normalising

Moonlight I'm not argueing about the arctic. I'm on about the antarctic.

Kavvie that's interesting because apparently the oceans are supposed to be rising in temp.Also why doesn't the Maldives and the other Islands at risk flood every summer when the oceans warm and the ice caps melt.It should be happening every spring.

Moonlight you might want to read this if you are willing to take the blinkers off. Sea ice is increasing and land ice is decreasing at the Antarctic. One nagates the other.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm

'We will experience destabilisation, the loss of our under-appreciated temperate climate'.

________________________________________________

Surely its better to have a cold snowy winter , rather than a normal grey British winter with non stop drizzle and rain .

I agree Coach buster. Makes a nice change. snow brightens the winter up.

Moon Light, I know you mean well but please try to check out some facts for yourself, rather than believing what you see on the TV. Believe me you are being conned, and you have bought it hook line and sinker. That's understandable, as the propaganda is very strong, thus those that don't seek the true facts themselves could perhaps be forgiven for their naivety.

"An advertising campaign touting the depth and quality of the Times newspapers environment coverage has been slapped by an industry watchdog for inaccuracy. The paper has agreed to modify the advertisements, which are based on a false climate change claim.

The Times ads claimed that global warming had caused the North East shipping passage, the icy Arctic route which in summer links Russias European ports to the Bering Strait, to be opened for the first time. In fact, the North East Passage opened in 1934, and was opened to overseas traffic after the fall of the Soviet Union. Modern technology, specifically radar, has permitted a safer passage in recent years."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/06/london-times-forced-to-recant-ads-touting-ne-passage/#more-14898

True science values scepticism, whilst political faith based science hates it and punishes it as heresy with the rack and the Inquisition.

Personally, after much studying of the facts, I am convinced that anthropogenic CO2 emissions have a negligible affect on climate. The tide of independent scientific opinion is turning that way too, and I'm confident it will not be too long before the whole CO2 political scare story is proven to be nonsense.

We have to be thankful to the anthropogenic global warming proponents for one thing. If it werent for them and their voodoo science, climate science wouldnt have attracted the attention of physicists, chemists, astro physicists and other non-climate scientists, and we would be sleepwalking into the rather disruptive cooling that is coming next decade. We have a few years to prepare for that in terms of agricultural production.

Did you know that total global anthropogenic CO2 accounts for just 0.0015% of our atmosphere. The UK is responsible for 2% of that figure i.e. if the UK halted all fossil fuel consumption over night, that would lower atmospheric CO2 by 0.00003%. The effects would be economically and humanly devastating, whilst of course having absolutely zero influence on climate. That's apart from the fact that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant at all and our atmosphere is actually rather diminished, present concentration being 385ppmv (0.0385%). Levels have been much higher in the past, naturally of course, resulting in great benefits to plant life, forestry, farming and humans.

Like most people, I suspect you misunderstand the Greenhouse Effect. Warmists will usually state that CO2 is a greenhouse gas so adding more and more must result in more and more heat reflected back to Earth. This is false. It is no more than a logical fallacy.

As a simplistic demonstration of the effects of CO2, perhaps we could ask them to imagine greenhouse gases in the atmosphere representing 10 duvets on their bed (9 for water vapour 1 for CO2/Methane/Nitrous oxide) (water vapour accounts for 90% of green house gases) whilst they're snug as a bug inside. Adding another duvet will make no difference, adding another 10,20,30 or more duvets will make no difference. So it is with CO2.

The effect of carbon dioxide on temperature is logarithmic and thus climate sensitivity decreases with increasing concentration. The first 20 ppm of carbon dioxide has a greater temperature effect than the next 400 ppm. Remember, atmospheric CO2 concentration is just 385 ppmv (0.0385%) and of that amount less than 4% is of human origin. Reducing that 4% to 3% or even zero would have no effect whatsoever on global climate. Meanwhile, the oceans de-gas and re-sink CO2 at varying rates naturally, always following temperature never preceding it.

For the last 2 years the Sun has been very quiet, sunspot activity has been at its lowest recorded level for more than 100 years, solar cycle 23 was extra long (normally 11 years) with a long solar minimum, and cycle 24 is predicted to be weak. There's a high probability that we are now entering a period of climate similar to the Dalton minimum circa 1800 (end of the little ice age) when solar activity was similarly quiet.

The solar/climate relationship is like this :

Lower magnetic field strength = fewer sunspots = reduced solar wind = increased high energy cosmic rays = increased low level cloud formation = increased albedo = cooler Earth.

You are seeing the effects of weak total solar irradiance right now. The effects of solar eruptivity (increased cosmic ray flux) are seperate to this, and are the main reason we will see a cooling climate for years to come.

The northern hemisphere is experiencing record breaking low temperatures. Global warming does not cause global cooling! Please question your logic!

Anyone who's interested can browse a few of the climategate scandal email exchanges at the link below. You shoud keep in mind that the exchanges are between the supposed top government funded climate scientists of the world, whose decisions form the basis of goverment policy.

Quote from Professor Kevin Trenberth :

"Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record.

Nice one trev.


Moon Light 06 Jan 13:43
Who paid for that .com site?
Some people are very naive. There is money behind all this manipulation. Billions are at stake.

Too darned right there's billions at stake... Billions in green 'taxes', Al Gore's paypacket.. to name just those for starters.

Surely its better to have a cold snowy winter , rather than a normal grey British winter with non stop drizzle and rain .

Not if you like betting on the horses.

I experienced the last time polar air came seriously south, below the Highland Line.
Just about every pipe in the West of Scotland burst. Our whole built environment isn't designed for this.
I got on the train to the South, and arrived at Glasgow Central. As I got off the train, it felt like stepping under a cold shower. I was wearing warm winter clothes, but was instantly chilled in a way I had never been before, not even in childhood. I stepped outside the Station, and found the shops closed and the streets deserted. This was the day the post-Christmas sales should have started, when normally you can't walk down the pavements for people. It was like a ghost-town, a city huddling round their fires in fear.
I soon realised that I couldn't stay outside till my train to England was due, as I was unendurably cold. I went back to the station and hid in the cafe.
The cold did not reach South of the Border, so the English media paid no heed.
It's often pointed out that we live at the same latitude as Newfoundland and Moscow. I don't think many people realise what a fine line we walk.

Where have all you guys come from? You don't usually post on here.
Are you gamblers at all?

Gamblers with a brain. Spot the difference.

And looking at the times of posts, I reckon out working all day too.

The ones that support AGW will be the same ones that bought into the Tamiflu propaganda. UK gov sepnd £0.5 billion on it. Independent researchers haven't been able to reproduce the claims of the drug's manufacturers. Now everyone knows Tamiflu is a king's new clothes drug. Global Warming will go the same way costing us many times the Tamiflu scam.

There is a world of difference between a drug company scam and allegations of a conspiracy involving thousands of people from every scientifically advanced country in the world.

Sunset Cristo 06 Jan 13:03

(Moon Light : All the melting ice at the Poles gives their claims a certain credibility.)

Moonlight you still haven't shown any credible evidence for this. you Say you saw it on a the News, but Wikipedia disagrees and you say the scientists have since admitted they got it wrong. You have provided no evidence for this.

SC, be wary of anything on Wikipedia as it's been taken over by a True Believer... a UK Government funded scientist and Green Party activist named William Connolley, who has turned Wikipedia into a global warming movement!

"All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. [b]When Connolley didnt like the subject of a certain article, he removed it

Perhaps you'd care to tell us about your own scientific background, Trevh?

The real money will be in a worldwide emissions trading scheme.It will make the stock exchange look like chump change.Why do you think banks,for example are all for it.You're right to think money is behind this Moon Light you just don't realise who stands to gain the most!

Could someone tell me who is the person that has set up the carbon emissions trading company/scheme?... and name two major shareholders in the company that manufactures Tamiflu.
These people stand to make a reasonable profit from these ventures.

clue No. 1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/6491195/Al-Gore-could-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html

clue No. 2

Conflict of interest or insider trading?

The saga of Tamiflu is just the tip of a big iceberg. As we noted in an earlier article, the real point of interest is the company in California who developed Tamiflu, Gilead Sciences, listed on the NASDAQ as (GILD). As we also noted, US Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, was Chairman of the Board of Gilead Sciences from 1997 until early 2001 when he became Defense Secretary. Rumsfeld had been on the board of Gilead since 1988, some thirteen years.

A as-yet-unconfirmed report is that Rumsfeld recently purchased additional stock in his former company, Gilead Sciences, worth $18 million, making him one of its largest if not the largest stock owners today. Whether that is true or not, earlier this year, when the Bird Flu scare was just heating up, according to a report in the November 14 Fortune magazine, the Defense Secretary decided not to sell his many shares in Gilead so as to

clue No. 3

In March the reliable Washington friend, Britains Tony Blair, ordered the UK Government to buy enough Tamiflu drugs to supply 25% of the 56 million British citizens. Mr Blair seems always ready to help his friends in Washington whether backing Washingtons war against WMD in Iraq or Tamiflu. In Washington its called the

Guys, we shouldn't forget to mention the Chairman of The IPCC (intergovernmental panel on climate change) has a rather large undeclared conflict of interest, and like Gore is up to his neck in carbon trading scams.

Here's a recent letter to Chairman Pachauri calling for his removal from office:

"We note that throughout your chairmanship of the IPCC you have also been chairman of Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI), founded by the multi-billion-dollar Tata steel and energy conglomerate. In 2003 the institute, which you have headed since 1981, was renamed simply

And for anyone interested, here's an open letter to PM Rudd of Australia, explaining the utter futility of attempting to control the climate via taxes.


"One-fiftieth of a Celsius degree of warming forestalled is all that complete, global compliance with the Copenhagen Accord for an entire decade would achieve. Yet the cost of achieving this result an outcome so small that our instruments would not be able to measure it would run into trillions of dollars. Do your Treasury models demonstrate that this calculation is in any way erroneous? If they do, junk them".

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/open_letter_rudd.pdf

I posted this in the politics forum, but wouldn't want anyone to miss it, I was in stitches watching this...

http://www.youtube.com/user/ilovecarbondioxide#p/a...