41 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

The Guardian said:

One of the most irritating things that climate scientists have to put up with these days is the bombardment of what I call "bollockspeak" from scientifically illiterate celebrity deniers and polemicists hiding behind their pulpits in the national press. Ignorance is bliss, or so they say, but it can also be perfidious; especially so when accompanied by the mindless arrogance and puffed-up smugness of the know-it-all who demonstrably does not know it all.

This was displayed to perfection at the Hay festival a few weeks ago. I was talking about my new book, Waking the Giant, which addresses the well-established, but not widely known, links between a changing climate and a sometimes violent response from the solid Earth.

As usual the questions at the end of my presentation were astute and well-informed. I did think it a little odd, however, that the climate change deniers appeared to be absent, or were at least keeping their heads down.


Read more

[Coffey]

Well in fairness, every week we have a new story in the media about climate change/global warming etc.


Now this article is a bit strange. I didn't get if he was global warming was real or  just climate change?

As I have come to the conclusion, climate chnage is natural anyway. It's part of the Earths cycle. Global warming is man made from polution... That is how I see the difference. Now back to seeing it in the mdia every week, it's not the same story we here. One week it's Global warming by polution, the next it's natural.. this goes on and on every week.

[Capt Amerika]

Its been a lot quieter recently because Al Gore has his Millions of dollars from speaking out about Global Warming and the evil Humans and now that we have peaked at the Solar Maximum its time for him to go away because over the next 5 -10 years we will see temps going back the other direction.
Climate is always changing, its not something new.

[Doug1o29]

Capt Amerika, on 10 July 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

Its been a lot quieter recently because Al Gore has his Millions of dollars from speaking out about Global Warming and the evil Humans and now that we have peaked at the Solar Maximum its time for him to go away because over the next 5 -10 years we will see temps going back the other direction.
Climate is always changing, its not something new.

The solar cycle has been around since forever.  It's not actually a cycle, but it is pretty close to being one.  If it is what is driving global temps, then we should see temperature patterns repeating themselves in roughly nine-year cycles.  There would be no new records being set.  We'd just be repeating what has happened before.

Instrumental records in the central US go back to 1891 - that's called the "modern" record.  Military records go back to 1828, except in Oklahoma - it was Indan territory so nobody thought it was worth keeping records.  Before that, I have tree-ring records (shortleaf pine) going back to 1650.  There are some post oak records that go back farther.  Bristlecone records from California go back 8400 years and the European oak chronology goes back to the Ice Age.  All show nothing much happening before 1908 and nearly-continuous temperature rise since then.

Since 1908, the world in general and Oklahoma, in particular, have been getting warmer.  There was a brief decline in temps in the 1950s and 1960s, but otherwise, it has been getting warmer and that includes the slow-down in temperature rise since 1998.  This is not at all cyclical.  This is something new - something that can't be explained on the basis of natural cycles.

The term "climate change" has somewhat replaced the term "global warming" because it doesn't make sense to say "warming" when you're talking about changing rainfall patterns.  Nevertheless, global warming is what "climate change" is really all about, so the two are pretty much interchangeable.

The evidence isn't all in yet, but the "wild" weather of the past five years is what we expect "climate change" to look like in the near term.  If "global warming" is not happening, then this wild weather will calm down and return to normal in the next few years; on the other hand, if global warming is real, what we are seeing is just the beginning and there is a lot worse to come.  Stay tuned.
Doug

[Charlie Prime]

Jeremy Clarkson is what is known as a Useful Idiot.

https://en.wikipedia...ki/Useful_idiot

"...a pejorative term used to describe people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they do not understand, who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause."

Like George Clooney, Angelina Jolie, and Bono, they parrot whatever meme their handlers tell them to promote because they are too ignorant or afraid to investigate the matter.  It's a well paying gig if you can get it.

Clarkson's job is to sell the Climate Change scam to retarded U.K. gear heads who are too dumbed down to understand they are nothing more than tax livestock to the Elites who run the scam.

[Karlis]

The Basic Science Of Climate Change Is Undeniable

This article concludes with the following statement:

In the end, everything about climate science boils down to one simple fact: all else being equal, increasing the concentration of carbon dioxide in a mixture of gasses will cause the mixture to absorb more heat.

That is the simple, undeniable fact that underlies the science of climate change.
Source

[lightly]

... yes,   and that mixture now contains about 1/3 more C02  than it did for the previous 200,000 years,  as measured in ancient ice samples.

[Karlis]

lightly, on 11 July 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

... yes,   and that mixture now contains about 1/3 more C02  than it did for the previous 200,000 years,  as measured in ancient ice samples.

And that means ...?

[questionmark]

Karlis, on 11 July 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

And that means ...?

Depends what you want to know, for one it means that Carbon dioxide, as a greenhouse gas retains more heat than other gases. It also means that plants could grow faster (if we don't trample them down or seal the surfaces with bitumen and cement). It could mean that plants grow bigger, unless of course we kill the biotope where they would have enough water to do that and plant oil palms.

There are enough auto correctives...  if humans would not be destroying them from every angle.

[Doug1o29]

Karlis, on 11 July 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

And that means ...?

That temperature rise will occur in predictable, and therefore, testable, ways like:

The greatest warming occurs in the dryest areas:  it will not be uniform.

If it is not uniform, there will be places where there is actually short-term cooling.

If some places get warmer, while others get cooler, there will be greater pressure differences between warmer and cooler areas and, therefore, more storms.

Etc.
Doug

[Charlie Prime]

Karlis, on 11 July 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

The Basic Science Of Climate Change Is Undeniable

This might be true if the Climate Scam were based upon science.

It is not.

[OverSword]

Clarkson was miffed because a sensationalist jouralist did some sensational journalism on him.  Maybe he should just not give a rats buttocks what non-scientists say about his work.

If you think about it, and if what his book is about is what I think it's about, then there is just no denying Clarkson's claims.  Climate change can result in rather violent and spectacular events.

• example; at the end of the last ice age a glacier melted in NW Canada. the resulting flood created what is known as the bad lands in the state of Washington.  The marks caused by rapidly flowing water are clearly visible and if there were any people living in the area then they were surley drowned and likely washed down the columbia river and into the pacific ocean.

Probably Clarkson only published this article to increase the sales of his new book.  Can't realy fault him for that and I may even read it, sounds interesting.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Smug man from the Guardian is exceeding himself in displaying his intellectual superiority and disdain for anyone who does not share his opinions.

"One of the most irritating things that climate scientists have to put up with these days is the bombardment of what I call "bollockspeak" from scientifically illiterate celebrity deniers and polemicists hiding behind their pulpits in the national press"

Smug man from Guardian would clearly prefer people not to have the right to state their opinions if they are not "scientifically literate" enough to satisfy his stringent criteria; i.e. if they do not agree with him.

" the mindless arrogance and puffed-up smugness of the know-it-all who demonstrably does not know it all."

oh the irony, smug man from Guardian.

[Doug1o29]

Charlie Prime, on 11 July 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

This might be true if the Climate Scam were based upon science.

It is not.

So, exactly what science do you doubt and why?  Where are the mistakes and/or misrepresentations that you think negate the thousands of research articles on the topic?  Time to back up what you're saying.  Or are you just blowing smoke?
Doug

[OverSword]

Nobody really read the article did they?