Climate Change is here and man made

Jim Tolmie's Underpants said:
It simply IS! All of the data sets except for the new NOAA/NCDC data set show a hiatus (with NASA LOTI being the other data set coming closest to not showing a hiatus). I suggest you read this: http://judithcurry.com/2015/11/06/hiatus-controversy-show-me-the-data/
Click to expand...

It's interesting, but doesn't really say anything new. The most important aspect of this is that all the data sets are surface temperature, which accounts for a very tiny proportion of the planet's heat sink. Even then, the article shows that the same data could be interpreted in many different ways, with one end of the spectrum being the increase continues unchanged, the other end being that there has been no increase.

One of the grpahs I posted shows deep sea temperatures (where the enormous majority of the globe's heat-mass lies), which show not one tiny bit of a hiatus!

Jim Tolmie's Underpants said:
I've been above my average height for the past 540 months. Using your logic that means I am getting taller.
Click to expand...

haha! funny! of course you have got taller since you were your average height.
 
stonerblue said:
Once again you completely ignore the facts and spout more un-informed rubbish due to a lack of basic knowledge on the subject
Click to expand...
I've listened to the 'facts' from both sides of the argument. NASA scientists, profs from universities, metrology experts, charity workers in devolving countries, politicians, even Piers Corbyn! The conclusion that I have come to is that man made climate change isn't happening, natural climate change is happening all the time and there's no disputing it.
You're not going to change my opinion just as much as I'm not going to change yours.
 
stonerblue said:
Not sure how IB?
Click to expand...

There is a well-respected school of thought doing the rounds (for quite some time too) that the notion of man-made climate change has been propagated by large US and European multinationals in order to limit and slow the industrial growth of developing nations. This appears to be through a concern of losing market share and influence, sparked by the rise of lower-cost Chinese and Indian products. Ergo, if the developing world can be convinced that they are responsible for polluting the environment, and restrictions can be put in place to limit and control their growth, the established business powers can maintain the status quo to a larger extent than if the developing nations' economies were allowed to grow unchecked. The stronger their economies become, the weaker the established ones will then be.
 
Innsbruckblue said:
There is a well-respected school of thought doing the rounds (for quite some time too) that the notion of man-made climate change has been propagated by large US and European multinationals in order to limit and slow the industrial growth of developing nations. This appears to be through a concern of losing market share and influence, sparked by the rise of lower-cost Chinese and Indian products. Ergo, if the developing world can be convinced that they are responsible for polluting the environment, and restrictions can be put in place to limit and control their growth, the established business powers can maintain the status quo to a larger extent than if the developing nations' economies were allowed to grow unchecked. The stronger their economies become, the weaker the established ones will then be.
Click to expand...

Yes and Africa has been used as a football and strangled to death, literally. All will change on that continent very very soon as the Chinese will make pretty damn sure of that.
 
lazza said:
It's interesting, but doesn't really say anything new.
Click to expand...

That's hardly surprsing since there's been no rise in global temperature for around 18 years.

lazza said:
The most important aspect of this is that all the data sets are surface temperature...
Click to expand...

No they aren't. NASA GISS data is derived from surface stations combined with satellite data for SSTs.

lazza said:
... which accounts for a very tiny proportion of the planet's heat sink.
Click to expand...

Correct. Which is why satellite data is considered the most accurate.

"The strongest evidence for the hiatus comes from the satellite (microwave) observations of bulk atmospheric temperature, pioneered by Christy and Spencer. Analyses of these data have shown a statistically significant hiatus for a period as long as 21 years." - Prof. J. Curry.

And satellite data shows:

monckton1.png



lazza said:
Even then, the article shows that the same data could be interpreted in many different ways, with one end of the spectrum being the increase continues unchanged, the other end being that there has been no increase.
Click to expand...

The article does no such thing:

"The bottom line with regards to the hiatus is all of the data sets except for the new NOAA/NCDC data set show a hiatus." Prof. J. Curry.

lazza said:
One of the grpahs I posted shows deep sea temperatures (where the enormous majority of the globe's heat-mass lies), which show not one tiny bit of a hiatus!
Click to expand...

You're clutching at straws...

With ocean heat content data before the ARGO era, the measurements are so sparse we are unable “to observe the motions of thermal anomalies in the mid- and high latitude oceans”, and since the introduction of the ARGO floats, there are “issues of missing and erroneous data and calibration”. Phrased other ways: ocean heat content is not a reliable dataset—and—it’s not a dataset in which we should have confidence. - Quotes attributed to Raymond Schmitt of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

lazza said:
haha! funny! of course you have got taller since you were your average height.
Click to expand...

Yet I haven't grown at all in the last few years. Hmmm...
 
Paul_Powers_Tash said:
Ten minutes research shows that global warming, er sorry, man made climate change is complete bollocks. So why does the majority of the mainstream media go along with it? Thankfully there are the odd exceptions to the rule:-

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta...d-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/

Does this finally put to bed the myth that there is such a thing as the free press?
Click to expand...

Now why would a magazine that's a homage to capitalism and US business interests print such a thing ?
 
kas_tippler said:
I've listened to the 'facts' from both sides of the argument. NASA scientists, profs from universities, metrology experts, charity workers in devolving countries, politicians, even Piers Corbyn! The conclusion that I have come to is that man made climate change isn't happening, natural climate change is happening all the time and there's no disputing it.
You're not going to change my opinion just as much as I'm not going to change yours.
Click to expand...

Then don't dress your opinion up as incontrovertible fact. I asked you to produce some evidence for your conclusions pages back but you declined.
 
stonerblue said:
Then don't dress your opinion up as incontrovertible fact. I asked you to produce some evidence for your conclusions pages back but you declined.
Click to expand...
I used the term 'facts', as nobody really knows. It's an opinion, you did ask for evidence and I did say that the atmosphere is 0.5 %carbon dioxide and of that 0.5% man made carbon dioxide is 3.5%. A tiny amount, we've been lead to believe that carbon dioxide is some kind of poison but it's not! I've listened Patrick Moore, who co founded Green Peace, and what he says, again in my opinion, is correct. Part of the business I'm in is in renewable energy, which is a fantastic idea, but the grants and funding given out in the name of climate change is eyewatering. I'm all for recycling and looking after the planet but to say we have any control over climate change is wrong, again in my opinion. I respect your opinion ,shame you can't respect mine and a few others.
 
Damocles said:
City have also scored more goals and less goals in the past 50 years. Therefore City as a club are exactly where they were 50 years ago
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is arguing against the climate being in flux. But it always has been and even very recently.
 
SWP's back said:
I don't think anyone is arguing against the climate being in flux. But it always has been and even very recently.
Click to expand...

I'll come back to this later hopefully, but whilst nobody argues that the climate is in flux the City analogy is that recently it has taken a massive and unprecedented step forwards that is incomprehensible to the natural order. Therefore whilst we had an influx of money that boosted us, the influx of greenhouses gases similarly boosted the global temperature.

I'd also like to point out that only the extreme crazies contend that this isn't happening; the argument tends to be in the details of how much and how much is human caused. This is a great progress for scientific discourse as now the public discourse is only 15 years behind which is rather good comparatively. Obviously excluding the science based arguments that some skeptics in this thread an elsewhere have made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top