Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Larry's Codpiece.
19 Dec 09 23:38
Joined:
Date Joined: 03 Dec 06
| Topic/replies: 3,737 | Blogger: Larry's Codpiece.'s blog
If the science is so settled. If the politicians get it. If, as Gormless said we only had 50 days to save the earth and there is no plan B:

What happened in Copenhagen?

The climate luvvies must be absolutely SEETHING.
Pause Switch to Standard View If global warming is such a threat.....
Show More
Loading...
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 12:39 AM GMT
ALMOST APOPLEPTIC.
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 12:40 AM GMT
POSITIVELY BOILING WITH RAGE.
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 12:41 AM GMT
All that indignation, generating such emotion and heat can't be good for the environment can it?
Report Prickard December 20, 2009 1:00 AM GMT
You're absolutely right. It's pathetic. They should put up, or shut up.
Report Arsenal Oldie December 20, 2009 8:16 AM GMT
can confirm it is still very cold today.

wish this global warming thing would get going.
Report wur December 20, 2009 9:01 AM GMT
It will. The sun has been in its quietest spell for over a century and is now headed towards the maximum point of its 11 year cycle in 2013. This will boost GHG induced global warming enough to set new record temperatures.
Report BobSievier December 20, 2009 9:03 AM GMT
We've had sars , bird flu , swine flu , aids , el nino and now climate change .....all**
Report alfie255 December 20, 2009 9:04 AM GMT
Because humans are generally pretty rubbish at seeing the bigger picture.
Report Dr Crippen December 20, 2009 9:11 AM GMT
This CC has been a big let down so far, all were getting over here is more rain.

Which gasses should we be releasing into the atmosphere to ensure we get more sunshine please?
Report Arsenal Oldie December 20, 2009 9:38 AM GMT
wur - if your predictive powers are that good - what's going to win the 3.30 at chepstow? ;-)
Report grendel December 20, 2009 9:51 AM GMT
so wur .. are you saying that we will have rising temperatures due to sunspots activity in cycle 24 ?
Report wur December 20, 2009 9:59 AM GMT
Yes. Solar variation contributes to natural global temperature variation. The 'Little Ice Age' in the 17/18th centuries coincided with a period of virtually no sunspot activity. That's unlikely to have been a coincidence.

The past 3 years have been unusually quiet, and (imo) may have moderated GHG induced warming. If that's the case, the run up to 2013 could see new temperature records being set. NASA expect a new global temperature record either next year or the year after.
Report caleyjags December 20, 2009 10:01 AM GMT
They also predicted 2009 would be warmest year on record 1 year ago.
Report Arsenal Oldie December 20, 2009 10:06 AM GMT
wur - couldn't the stronger sunspot activity heat the sea and cause the release of Co2? seems more likely than any of the other theories around.
Report wur December 20, 2009 10:27 AM GMT
You're more right than you know. I'm no scientist, but I'm fascinated by the interplay of all the various factors that can ramp up or damp down warming.

One of these is release of CO2 from warmer oceans. If all the CO2 produced by man stayed in the air, we would see a 3ppm annual rise. But the actual rise averages only half of that - 1.5ppm. The other 1.5ppm is taken up by the ocean and forests, but mainly the ocean.

Although the rise has averaged 1.5ppm annually, the actual increase in any given year can vary between 0.5 and 3ppm. CO2 is absorbed by cold water and released by warm water. I've looked at global sea surface temperature charts for the past 40 years and annual CO2 rise charts and there in an unmistakable correlation between High global SSTs and higher than average atmospheric CO2 rises. For the past 10 years, the average rise has been 2.1ppm.

If this is because the oceans are warmer, and I believe it is, then it's a hugely important development. Yet you hear virtually nothing about it in the news. It's almost as if scientists are afraid of being alarmist. There's a kind of 'wait and see' approach. It could be a short term blip. But I'm convinced it's a trend.

You heard it on Betfair politics forum, first.
Report Ivor December 20, 2009 11:53 AM GMT
The Government's Tourism minister has flown to the other side of the world for his Xmas hols whilst Gormless was in Copenhagen saving the planet. DUH!
Report Dr J December 20, 2009 12:58 PM GMT
[b**ard 20 Dec 02:00

You're absolutely right. It's pathetic. They should put up, or shut up.[/b]

Yes, spot on,**ard.
Report Powelliphanta superba superba December 20, 2009 1:58 PM GMT
http://www.infowars.com/scientists-considered-pouring-soot-over-the-arctic-i...
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 2:07 PM GMT
Dr J must be beyond a state of rage.
Report Manchild December 20, 2009 7:18 PM GMT
There are none so stupid who will not read valid science.

Fools stick to poor science and bandwagons. Just make sure you know your stuff before you write rubbish on here, Larry.
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 7:24 PM GMT
Manchild

Perhaps you could clarify what it is you have taken exception to in what I have written on this thread. You sound really knowledgable on the subject and so I can't wait for you to reveal the error of my ways.
Report Corky December 20, 2009 7:30 PM GMT
The concept of global warming involves the study of an immense and very complex system. anyone who tells you that global warming is understood and proven simply does not understand the situation or is a liar.
Report Manchild December 20, 2009 7:34 PM GMT
Hello Larry,

Where do you want to start?

Do you deny that mankind is impacting the earthly climate?

(easy one to start with!)
Report grendel December 20, 2009 7:40 PM GMT
i think 'deny' might be the wrong term
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 7:44 PM GMT
Manchild

I don't.
Report Manchild December 20, 2009 7:49 PM GMT
Good. And a concession from me.

Yes, the climate has been hijacked as a reason to raise taxes. We can get over that though.

Q2. Do you think we should study the real science and reach realistic and practical conclusions about how to pursue our attitude to the planet?
Report Larry's Codpiece. December 20, 2009 7:51 PM GMT
I do but I also think there needs to be a root and branch revue of all climate data and an attempt made to get all sides around the table to look at an accommodation which isn't politically driven.
Report Manchild December 20, 2009 7:59 PM GMT
Brill. We have common ground.

I want that too. I have friends in both camps, but unfortunately so much information is backed by financial interest. What swings it for me is the third group, with no vested interest, who despair at the corruption of information and who see the argument seemingly being lost to....now who could possibly benefit from a 'situation as normal' scenario?

People will always egg-up their argumant, and it simply has to stop. There is too much at stake on both sides.
Report Trevh December 23, 2009 9:31 PM GMT
wur 20 Dec 10:59
Yes. Solar variation contributes to natural global temperature variation. The 'Little Ice Age' in the 17/18th centuries coincided with a period of virtually no sunspot activity. That's unlikely to have been a coincidence.
Good so far, then this...

The past 3 years have been unusually quiet, and (imo) may have moderated GHG induced warming. If that's the case, the run up to 2013 could see new temperature records being set. NASA expect a new global temperature record either next year or the year after.

Oh dear. You're referring to solar irradiance, TSI (total solar irradiance) and like most comments such as this there is either forgetfulness or deliberate omission regarding the totally different solar forcing from solar eruptivity, which derives from the solar magnetosphere and solar wind and not the radiation (energy budget). This impacts on climate as the solar wind modulates high energy cosmic ray flux, which in turn affects low level cloud formation, and this results in changes in planetary albedo and hence climate.

http://bourabai.narod.ru/landscheidt/solarwind.htm

Near-Earth variations in the solar wind, measured by the geomagnetic aa index since 1868, are closely correlated with global temperature (r = 0.96; P 10-7). Geomagnetic activity leads temperature by 4 to 8 years.

First off note that the only temperature peak not attributed to solar is the exceptional 1940 to 1942 El Nino. Papers and artiles referring to this describe the troposphere as being in an anomalous state.

A 4 to 8 year lag time is shown from solar eruptivity to climate. The very high correlation, and correct order of events for causality i.e. solar first then temperature response, establish this as a cause-and-effect climate forcing and Svensmark's theory elaborates on the mechanism.

There is also climate forcing from an auroral oval mechanism linked to solar eruptivity that impacts on global atmospheric circulation patterns as well as the temperature of the troposphere, as published by Bucha and Bucha Jr in a peer reviewd paper.

Dr Nir Shaviv found a x5 to x7 amplification of solar irradiance forcing in climate response (Shaviv 2008) and this is likely showing the element of solar eruptivity that accompanies irradiance changes.

Finally from the link below, Why is this important? Well, if Svensmark is right, and Galactic Cosmic Rays modulated by the suns magnetic field make a change in cloud cover on Earth, increasing it during low solar magnetic activity, we are in for some colder times.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/09/solar-geomagnetic-activity-is-at-an-all-time-low-what-does-this-mean-for-climate/


So overall the strong likelihood is that cooling will continue to 2013 and beyond, and we could even see the start of a Dalton minimum, perhaps even leading to a Maunder minimum. Brrrrrrrr.
Meanwhile politicians are hell**on attempting to take us down the wrong path based on junk science, the inevitable consequences of which will be hopelessly inadequate preparation for hard winters to come. The Euro Tunnel fiasco will look like chicken feed.
Report OLD HEAD December 23, 2009 9:43 PM GMT
most global warming seems to happen in the summer,last winter was pretty bad,and its really cold now ,is it such a bad thing for things to warm up a little it would save on the heating bills in winter,and most of us like nice warm summers.
Report Trevh December 23, 2009 9:55 PM GMT
OLD HEAD 23 Dec 22:43


most global warming seems to happen in the summer,last winter was pretty bad,and its really cold now ,is it such a bad thing for things to warm up a little it would save on the heating bills in winter,and most of us like nice warm summers.


We haven't seen any global warming for 10 years, but as you say it would be nice! Unfortunately though man cannot control the climate! It will be what it will be, and that looks like cold winters ahead.
Report BROTHER1 December 25, 2009 5:14 AM GMT
how can governments be serioes about man made global warming, when they hold meetings involving thousands of people and all that wasted energy. its a complete joke, just an excuse to have a party and then raise taxes to pay for it.
Report wur December 25, 2009 9:52 AM GMT
I believe the cosmic ray hypothesis has been refuted by other scientists. It was an unproven, speculative hypothesis.
Report wur December 25, 2009 9:57 AM GMT
Here's the research which disproved the cosmic ray hypothesis:


[b]ScienceDaily (May 12, 2009)
Report Trevh December 25, 2009 4:32 PM GMT
Wur, nothing has been disproved. This explains a little more...

Scientist David Archibald said:
"Do we live in a special time in which the laws of physics and nature are suspended? No, we do not. Can we expect relationships between the Suns activity and climate, that we can see in data going back several hundred years, to continue for at least another 20 years? With absolute certainty.
In this presentation, I will demonstrate that the Sun drives climate, and use that demonstrated relationship to predict the Earths climate to 2030. It is a prediction that differs from most in the public domain. It is a prediction of imminent cooling. [cut]

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 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.
Stopping coal-fired power generation due to carbon dioxide emissions is exactly wrong in science. The more carbon dioxide you put into the atmosphere, the more you are helping all living things on the planet and of course that makes you a better person."

http://westinstenv.org/wp-content/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pdf
Report Trevh December 25, 2009 4:42 PM GMT
This is also interesting from Professor Oliver K. Manuel...

"As noted in a message that I sent about eight days ago to Dr. John Holdren, Science Advisor to President Barack Obama, the scientific community has no knowledge about Earths heat source (the Sun) because politicians misused federal grant funds to protect the inflated egos of power-hungry scientists over the past five decades (1960-2010):

Former President Eisenhower warned of the dangers of an unholy alliance developing between scientists and politicians in his farewell address in January 1961, but despite his warning that is exactly what has happened.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a private group that numbers you among its members, has trained scientists with grant funds the way Pavlov trained dogs with dog biscuits at least since the time when I started my research career in 1960.

The integrity of publicly financed science has been essentially destroyed. "

Qualifications
NSF Postdoctoral Fellow, University of California, Berkeley, Physics and Mass Spectrometry, 1964.
Ph.D., University of Arkansas, Nuclear Chemistry and Mass Spectrometry, 1963.
M.S., University of Arkansas, Nuclear Chemistry, 1962.
B.S., Kansas State College, Pittsburg, Kansas, Chemistry and Mathematics, 1959.

Anybody who's interested in reading about and discussing the real science of climate should take a look at the website below, where many scientists exchange opinions. Unlike RealClimate.com (run by government scientists) your opinions will not be censored if they don't conform!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

Merry christmas to all!
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com