Climate change anyone?

The change over the past 150 yrs, if it is there at all, is negligible. It doesn't matter. What matters is what is going to happen in the future, I thought that's what all the furor was about.

So, simply put, the idea that anyone can predict what is going to happen 50 or 100 years (except for astronomy) in the future is beyond belief. No one has that kind of credibility.

And, not to make too fine a point of it, we don't vote on objective (scientific) truth.

So, there are those who are compelled to follow orders, be impressed with authority (97% of experts, etc.), and there are those who make up their own minds using a variety of sources.

At least, that's how I see it.

Cheers

 

Frederick you really got to read up on this mate, what sources have you used??? Is this Frederick asserting it's 'negligible' or again have you a reference? There are a lot of folks who have done a lot of study who thinks "It does matter!"

Yep you've got that one right.

Again see John Beddington's quote. Analogy, there's evidence a bushfire is heading in your direction, but no there's no guarantee that it will continue in your direction so hey no worries.

Sorry would you explain.

Here we go, now I'm following orders, what next oh independent thinker? I'm influenced with what the majority of all scientific fields think, take for example the thoughts of Kirby, Spooner, Fuller & others in podiatry.

And again please what are your sources that you use??????????????????????????

 

Mark JC

Well, you have a good weekend too. It's been just marvelous.

Cheers

 

Thought so.

 

Try this one, http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2766216.htm

 

Well, a previous attempt at humour didn't seem to make it on here. Perhaps it was a bit low brow. I apologize to the censor if that was the case.

And certainly this subject does not apply directly to our foot business.

Be that as it may, many of us are looking forward to a bit of global warming, or global cooling, either way we will just deal with it like we always have before.

Some places will be better off, and some worse off.

If chicken little is right, no big deal. It's all just the current version of "the end of the world is nigh."

So, may we live in interesting times.\

As always, Cheers

 

"Severe global warming could make half the world's inhabited areas literally too hot to live in, a US scientist warned today."...
...Steven Sherwood, a climate expert at Yale University, told a global warming conference in Copenhagen that people will not be able to adapt to a much warmer climate as well as previously thought....
"The physiological limits of the human body will begin to render places impossible to support human life if the average global temperature rises by 7C on pre-industrial levels", he said....
....the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said that average temperatures could rise by 6C this century if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at current rates. ....
..."Seven degrees would begin to create zones of uninhabitability due to unsurvivable peak heat stresses and 10C would expand such zones far enough to encompass a majority of today's population."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/12/global-warming-temp-rise-population

Not nice young Frederick

 

Well Mark, thank you for the "young" compliment.

I've sort of gotten into the yin and yang of this ping pong thing we have going here. I guess no one else is interested.

"Could" and "if" statements by "experts" just don't cut it. People just aren't that naive.

Public opinion has actually reversed as of late, with more and more people thinking that all this global warming is just a nonsense. People generally take anything the meteorologist says with a grain of salt.

But I have faith in humans, they are a clever species, and prolific survivors.

Perhaps beachfront property in Greenland would be a good long term investment.

And here in Christchurch, we will be much closer to the beach, although we'll have to heliski on Mt. Cook.

Noah's ark, anyone?

Cheers

 

The planet's existence is not questioned, I'm certainly not concerned about its future, it's all the living things on it!

Does that apply to podiatry 'experts' as i've already mentioned in an earlier post?

Yes, the campaign by big-money petro-chemical lobby is working, unfortunately, working on the gullibility of the masses.

And obviously the climate scientists.

see article in previos post.

enjoy!


mark

 

big money, the end of life as we know it, regurgitation journalist articles citing the same data (polar bears, Himalayan glaciers, African crop failure) = paranoia

"Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep, starts when you're always afraid, step out of line, the man will come and take you away."

"If" and "could" don't work for anyone. I would think that anyone who listens to an expert in any field, especially their own, would do so criitically, seeing if the new information coincides with their own experience. Otherwise we would all just be trained sheep. But then, maybe some of us are.

Climatologists are just jumped up meteorologists, ask a geologist what he thinks. The rivalry is similar to podiatric surgeons/orthopods.

For an alternative take, perhaps The Skeptical Environmentalist or State of Fear, especially the extensive Appendix, see Eugenics.

Cheers

 

Yep it figures, you're a Lomborg sucker, do some reading of critiques of his work!
And if you're starting with eugenics i'm out

 

Mark ... Mark ... Mark ... Shame on you! Name calling at your age.

I guess ignorance is bliss, huh Mark? If something doesn't agree with your anxious, paranoid mind set you don't want to hear about it?

The parallel with eugenics in the early 20th century illustrates the dangers with the politicization of science.

He who does not know the errors of history is bound to repeat them.

Cheers

 

Great snowing in Barcelona

Yesterday we experienced the greatest snowing since 1985. Global warming? Weather is changing but to where?

 

Nice:
A few years ago when there was less snow than normal in the ski areas in western USA the global warming intellects blamed it on, of all things, Global warming. Gongressonal hearings were done and they stated that most of the ski resorts would be closed due to lack of snow within 10 years.

Now, of course, we are having MORE snow than average. Guess what they blame it on? Good guess - GLOBAL WARMING!

SO, global warming causes LESS AND MORE snow! I'm sure someone pulled an all nighter trying to rationalize THAT argument!

Steve

 

It would be nice if our leaders stop to treat us like stupids and tell us what they want without lies. If they want us to buy electric cars to increase car industries profits and to pay at least 30% more in our electric bill because of "green energies" and increase energy industries profits also; just say that. We could save money with useless global climate change conferences.

Climate has changed regardless human activity. Earth has experienced warm and cold eras. Of course, human activity affects environment (many times for worse). But if a climate change has started it can not be stopped. How can global warming theory can explain current weather conditions?

 

Also at issue, besides reducing air pollution, is to reduce or eliminate dependence on Arab oil. Before Arab Muslims had money, they couldn't cause any trouble.

If their oil isn't worth much, as one State Department official said, "The middle east will be a place no one goes anymore."

Obviously this objective can't be stated outright, and the global warming scientists are probably not complicit. But once the big governments saw this advantage they changed their tune and jumped on board the global warming bandwagon.

So, overall it may end up to be a good thing, even though it won't do anything to solve anthrogenic global warming, if in fact it exists.

We just don't need to get worked up over it, unless of course we have a personal need to be worked up over something. It's a good thing to worry about in that regard, because it's so far off that we can consolidate our worrying. Books can be written, careers made, Nobel prizes won.

Sort of like a previous generation worrying about the end of the world as we know it from nuclear war.

Much better than Y2K, which was worth worrying about for only a year, and then flopped!

It should be interesting, once again.

Cheers

 

Just another example how "experts" solutions for stopping "Global Warming" it lead us to new problems.

I have extracted these number from http://www.worldometers.info/cars/:

How many cars are produced in the world every year?

For 2009, global vehicle sales remain in the midst of a precipitous fall-off, led by sharp declines in the mature markets of the United States, Western Europe and Japan. We project total cars produced at 51,971,328.

In 2006 there were 49,886,549 passenger cars produced in the world, with an increase of 6.45% over the previous year. The increase for 2007 was more modest, and 2008 showed a decline. Analysts from various institutes had in fact pegged the year 2007 as the year which would end the 5-year cycle (2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006) of record global auto sales worldwide.
year cars produced in the world

2009 (projection) 51,971,328
2008 52,940,559
2007 54,920,317
2006 49,886,549
2005 46,862,978


If all these cars would be electric. Do you know the HUGE problem we would face to recycle electric batteries made of poisonous materials that can contaminated our environment? How much energy is necessary to keep this cars moving? How can we produce such energy?

I am not sure if everybody knows how much energy can be obtained from a single oil barrel; neither this State Department official. "Green energy" costs at least 30% than oil to produce the same quantity of energy. Are we willing to pay this bill? Can we pay this bill? How does it will affect to economy competitiveness?

The funny thing is, Spanish government for example, want to produce energy using only "Green" fonts. But, we have to buy energy to the French that produce it through... guess that... NUCLEAR power.

Also, many eolic parks (paradigmatic "green energy") projects in Spain are stopped because "ecologist" pressure groups thinks they affect negatively landscape vision!!!!

If Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about a sexual affair, our leaders should be indicted for telling us so BIG lies.

 

"If all these cars would be electric."

Well, I have a question. Where does the energy (most of it) come from to recharge these batteries?

Anyone know?

Steve

 

Mainly from fossil fuel combustion that produces carbon dioxide.....:craig:

 

A Washington post June 6, 2010 article,

The three months that just ended have not been merely warm: they were the second warmest March, April and May in Washington's weather history

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/05/AR2010060504657.html

 

Ah yes, but of course that matters because it was warm, whereas if it is cold (this past winter) it is only short term weather, unrelated to climate change.

We can probably all agree on the more recent phrase "climate change." Of course the climate is changing, it has always been changing. So we can agree to a completely empty, innocuous name.

As to whether it is getting colder or warmer, or whether it is truly global rather than regional, or if it is anthropomorphic, or if it is a bad thing or good thing, or if we can really do anything about it, well . . .

But a nice subject to argue about, certainly less likely to cause a punch up than politics or religion.

Cheers

I'm going skiing this weekend. :drinks

 

[size = 10]NOAA: May Global Temperature is Warmest on Record[/size]
"The combined global land and ocean surface temperature was the warmest on record for May, March-May (Northern Hemisphere spring-Southern Hemisphere autumn), and the period January-May according to NOAA. Worldwide average land surface temperature for May and March-May was the warmest on record while the global ocean surface temperatures for both May and March-May were second warmest on record, behind 1998,...."
"

The monthly analysis from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, which is based on records going back to 1880



http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100615_globalstats.html

 

NOAA: May Global Temperature is Warmest on Record
"The combined global land and ocean surface temperature was the warmest on record for May, March-May (Northern Hemisphere spring-Southern Hemisphere autumn), and the period January-May according to NOAA. Worldwide average land surface temperature for May and March-May was the warmest on record while the global ocean surface temperatures for both May and March-May were second warmest on record, behind 1998,...."
"

The monthly analysis from NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, which is based on records going back to 1880



http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100615_globalstats.html

 

Chicken Little was right?

Cheers

 

________________________________
Hi Mark,

And I can not understand why people can be taken in by this con of the century either?

The earth has been warming up and cooling down here for approx. 15 Billion years without any help from us!

But people/Mankind have been searching for something new to whinge over also for centuries past!

Just think if we live for a few million more years the Sun will blow up just to say, "There now I told you so!!!"

Yours,

Colin.

 

Who's taken in colin??? you don't like facts colin?

 

Facts Mark?

I thought they were opinions about Creation are they not made up by Evolutionist!

Pseudo-science telling us that we have been naughty boys and that we all our going to be cursed by designs to prove a political social science case? We are all doomed you know, doomed well the Bible says so anyway and it is usually right isn't it!

Well now that smoking is dead and buried according to some the Chancellor needs to raise taxes from somewhere else? Environmental pollution I suppose will do will it not for now, don't you think!

Yours,

Colin.

 

And an example of "pseudo-science" would be what????????? Deniers seem to disregard facts when discussing the subject. Please if there's some evidence to the contrary provide it. And feel free to add Monckton to your responses, such a buffoon with his incessant misquotes and fabricated graphs. Any challenge, and i'm talking the 'big picture', please, yours truly, mark conley

 

For your childrens, childrens childrens, .... sake please watch this, a real scientist explaining how Christopher Monckton fidges everything!!!!

http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/

 

I love the "pseudo-science". Do you label all experts in all fields, not just science, but medicine, economics etc. as "con-artists"? Of course not, so why be so ignorant when it applies to climate science????? And still no facts, data Colin, just verbose dribble.

 

Hey Mark

When you starting carrying on a dialogue with yourself, I think it means no one wants to play.

Chicken Little was one frustrated little bird.

Cheers

 

That's because no denier has any factual evidence for their position. Did you watch the presentation?

 

Oh yeah, and FY

 

December 2010 was the second-coldest December in the entire history dating back to 1659," noted Steve McIntyre, a climate scientist and the editor of climate blog Climate Audit. He bases his claim on data from the longest continuous record in the world, kept by The Met Office, the U.K.'s official weather agency.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/24/planet-hottest-ever-global-warming/#ixzz1C3Tz5at2

 

Goodaye Steve, you wrote,

December 2010 was the second-coldest December in the entire history dating back to 1659,"......... He bases his claim on data from the longest continuous record in the world, kept by The Met Office, the U.K.'s official weather agency.
A reference would be useful as I perused the Met Office website, and at http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2011/2010-global-temperature,
" Locally, the UK recorded its coldest year since 1986 and its coldest December on record. However, very few parts of the world were significantly colder than normal during 2010. The Northern Hemisphere experienced its warmest year with a mean temperature anomaly of 0.69 °C."

and also at http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_906_en.html,
which is from the first reference in the article you used,
"December 2010 was exceptionally warm in eastern Canada and Greenland. It was abnormally cold through large parts of northern and western Europe, with monthly mean temperatures as much as 10°C below normal at some locations in Norway and Sweden. Many places in Scandinavia had their coldest December on record. December in Central England was the coldest since 1890. .... It was also colder than average in large parts of the Russian Federation and in the eastern United States, ..."

So shouldn't your opening line qualify "the second-coldest December" with, "in some restricted regions of the world"!

Then the article you refer to, http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/24/planet-hottest-ever-global-warming/#ixzz1C3Tz5at2

Global warming is in full swing, say some of the world's climatologists. Or is it?
NICE TWIST, should read, "some of the world's climatologists disagree"

But how reliable is the data? Here are five good reasons some scientists are skeptical of these claims.
Yep that's ~3% of climate scientists

1. Where does the data come from? .......
The "Urban Heat Island effect" (UHI). A real phenomena with little effect as agencies do adjust effected stations data; note the most populated regions of the world where the majority of the effected stations are, are not in the global regions with greatest temperature increases! how inconvenient
Oh yeah and satellite data still show the dramatic GLOBAL temperature increase

Many climate skeptics also take issue with NASA and NOAA, the U.S. agencies that gather U.S. climate data, but also manipulate and "normalize" it.
Love the 'manipulate' >>>>references be handy. What happens to data in statistics????

Satellite data is arguably the most accurate way to measure temperature. Roy Spencer, a climatologist and former NASA scientist, ...
Yep did you look at his website and notice the graph! Also the data he uses haven't been adjusted to account for inhomogeneities like the land-based stations are!

Watts pointed FoxNews.com to a new, peer-reviewed paper ...
Ah yes, the infamous journal "Energy & Environment", don't try looking for an impact factor not even on the ISI list and check out the editorial board, and yep the author Patrick Frank, he's come out with some doosies in his time! Do a search!
Please note, Scopus lists "Energy & Environment" as a trade journal

2. There's less ice is in the oceans. Or more. Or something.
Now Christopher Monckton, they're getting really low here.
Not one reference! So I checked it out
Talking sea-ice, the Arctic decrease is 3-fold the Antarctic increase, wrong again Christopher, not Lord, and never was a scientific adviser to Thatcher, who by the way is a trained scientist (chemistry) and is a believer in AGW!!!!!

3. El Niño has been playing havoc with temperatures. ..
re Bastardi's statement, has an El Nino existed for 150 years???

Japan's Meteorological Agency agrees with Bastardi's conclusion, ....
I love this bit, the author firstly falsely claims the JMA agrees with Bastardi, and then conveniently and deviously omits the underlined phrase and then separates the last sentence to give the impression El Nino was solely responsible for 2010!

The exact quote is, " It can be presumed that the high temperatures in recent years have been influenced by natural climate fluctuations with the periods ranging from several years to several decades, as well as by global warming due to an increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gases including CO2. In addition to these contributions, this year’s warming can also be attributable to an El Niño event which lasted from summer 2009 to spring 2010."

I'm going for a swim, you depress me Steve

 

Hi Mark,

I attempted to insult you yesterday but I think it ended up in the middle of the Australian desert again!!!

You must not depend on the god Science, they have never got it right yet! The results produced and or used to prove or support something only works for a fleeting sense of our imagination!

Something like climate change is the in thing for the moment! Then guess what they change it for something else when it doesn't work!

Truth only exists in an old black leather coated book! Reason manufactured by Mankind only lasts for a fleeting moment and then is gone again for something else!!

I mean just look at the cure for warts, the only thing that ever worked for me was a miniature surgical gouge but I shut my eyes when using it!

Yours in Christ,

Colin.

 

Colin, sorry to hear the insult went astray.
Without science we would not be having this conversation.
I have been aware of anthropogenic climate effects since, for me, 1972. So there was literature available then though I don't think the terms "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" had been used.
If you're happy thinking that, as long as you don't force-feed it to any one in a dependent relationship to you, I am very, very happy for you. I'd have to say, though, I think you're deluded, but I'm only mentioning it because you are preaching to me.
Yours truly,
Mark

 

Blimey! "Never" is a bit harsh, isn't it? Bang goes biomechanics, the germ theory of disease, and a whole lot more besides! Sounds like my three year pod degree could have been a lot shorter, if all that useless science had been left out.

"Climate change skeptics?"

How about a word from the "Round Earth skeptics"? After all, it still looks flat enough to me, and the "big leather book" does clearly state that the Earth stands on pillars (1 Samuel 2:8).

 

____________________________________
Hi Peter ....,

You have got it, The Lord's World is flat and founded on His Pillars! Every time I go down to the sea each day I look out and see the sea's horizon drooping at both ends, I put my observation down to the weight of water you know?

You will be telling me next here the Pseudo-scientists have also observed that there was something now before the Big bang! Dark matter the ancients used to call ether if I remember rightly!

But never mind they also believe in evolution and the fact that we all stand on hot hot liquid metal. They have been there haven't they! Called Hell in some camps but not to worry they say, "Trust us for we are science, we know you know!"

Mind you casting a spell on a wart is going a bit to far don't you think, just pray over it first!!! .... !

Yours in Christ, He should know, He is The Creator!

Colin.

PS. Pillars: Torah, belief in the Creator Jesus, Dark matter, you know the bit of the puzzle that dropped off the end of our flat earth! Well what do you expect when you ignore The Creator, the earth is limited by parameters, He can not be infinite because we know we are finite and the dark matter has never put it out or understood it!

 

The global warming theory left him out in the cold.

Dr. Ivar Giaever, a former professor with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation Tuesday, Sept. 13, from the premier physics society in disgust over its officially stated policy that "global warming is occurring."
The official position of the American Physical Society (APS) supports the theory that man's actions have inexorably led to the warming of the planet, through increased emissions of carbon dioxide.

Giaever does not agree -- and put it bluntly and succinctly in the subject line of his email, reprinted at Climate Depot, a website devoted to debunking the theory of man-made climate change.

"I resign from APS," Giaever wrote.

Giaever was cooled to the statement on warming theory by a line claiming that "the evidence is inconvertible."
"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?" he wrote in an email to Kate Kirby, executive officer of the physics society. 

"The claim … is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period," his email message said.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011...-top-physics-group-over-global/#ixzz1Y1fN2H4p