Climate change- discuss

[Albedo]

No ones getting flamed in this thread Marco, not everybody is gonna read it all and all its .....g links. You raise a good point.

 

Personally I believe thats what BP Solar is for.... as in technology suppression, or at least making it expensive.

 

There is a quote I've been wanting to put in at some point....

 

"The stone age didn't end for lack of stones"

 

 

Edit: I don't know what flamed is, but if its bad I'll see it and I'll jump on them

Edited June 14, 2012 by Albedo

[cerneARB]

climate change or is it global warming or is it ozone depletion the shadow goverment cant make its mind up..either way its bull. Just another pychological tool to put fear into pepole and control them..oh and tax them to the hilt so the bankers cant get even more money and power.The world is warming naturaly because were coming out of an ice age. Enough said..case closed.

[Albedo]

climate change or is it global warming or is it ozone depletion the shadow goverment cant make its mind up..either way its bull. Just another pychological tool to put fear into pepole and control them..oh and tax them to the hilt so the bankers cant get even more money and power.The world is warming naturaly because were coming out of an ice age. Enough said..case closed.

 

Is this flaming? consider yourself jumped on...Jees!

Edited June 14, 2012 by Albedo
forgot ? again

[Pumpy]

Neither do they dispute the mechanism by which these gases warm our atmosphere.

I think it's the amount/potential that's hotly disputed.

 

Believe it or not, very little research has ever been funded to search for natural mechanisms of warming…it has simply been assumed that global warming is manmade. This assumption is rather easy for scientists since we do not have enough accurate global data for a long enough period of time to see whether there are natural warming mechanisms at work.

 

Have you ever looked into the PDO and other ocean cycles? It strikes me as very coincidental that the PDO switched to positive in 1977, just then it started warming up, it switch back to negative 3 or 4 yrs ago, just as it all started to cool down again!

 

The science of the ozone hole which is of award winning brilliance and provable by empirical data gained using stratospheric jets proves to the uninitiated that gases affect our atmosphere and climate.

 

I sat in a lecture yrs ago where the speaker told the story about Dupont making a killing on "ozone friendly" refrigerant gas, just before their patent on the old gas ran out the "ozone hole" was discovered, lucky for them eh It's not something I've studied though.

 

Your argument as a sceptic has to be that man made emissions can’t affect climate. Mine has to be that they can.

Read my prior posts, that is not my position at all, it's much more subtle than that.

 

I would also point out that if the sceptics are right then there is no problem. Just keep on emmiting what you like. If Climate Change Theory is right, then we have a really big problem because whats done can’t be undone.

It ain't a theory yet, after 30+yrs and untold billions spent on "science" it's still only a hypothesis The hypothesis keeps changing though eh, every time a solid sceptical argument is made on one part of the hypothesis we get an ad hoc tweak, it started off as "global warming" when it stopped warming it morphed into "climate change" it was even "climate disruption for a while. I posit the climate will cool off for the next 25 yrs because of the PDO, it may get a lot cooler when other ocean cycles switch negative too, no doubt some other ad hoc argument will come along to keep breathing life into the rotting corpse of global warming science.

 

The best lies have some truth to them, that's why it's so hard to knock down, Climate Sensitivity is very low IMO, but there is some truth there, nowhere near as high as the IPCC make out, no way.

 

I already linked that article showing fiddled temperature reconstructions, if that's what they have to do to keep the hypothesis alive, it's already dead IMO.

[Albedo]

With regard to the ozone hole bit...

 

I had to remember all the formulas for my Science degree... its as irrefutable as science gets. I used to walk around Brighton memorising all 4 pages of formulae... it did come up and I did remember it.

 

Thanks for your usual considered response... just doing this bit for now reading the rest while I have my spag bol.

 

A point thats been in the back of my mind is that we're coming at this from two different disciplines.....moi as an environmental scientist (by BSc) and you as a climatologist (clear that you are qualified BSc or not).

[Albedo]

Ocean cycles:

 

Predicted to lose the gulf stream in the UK = cooling

 

Hence the name change for the media to climate change from global warming...puts us on the same latitude as Canada doesn't it?

 

Lose the angry tone dude.. Your previous posts are not clear as to where you stand. Do you want the best of both worlds?

[Albedo]

Bugger I read your post twice and saw an aggressive tone then read it again and didn't see that tone at all.

 

May have got you wrong here and here's me trying to keep the peace.

 

Anyway the other readers have our arguments now so I'm gonna take a break. And yes I am being lazy.

 

Sorry if I read You wrong mate

 

Best Regards Paul

[Pumpy]

if looks like an angry tone I'll have to use more smilies, I have a Bsc in smilies did it look like an angry tone because I forgot to sign off (my tea was ready).

 

I can pick your expert opinion (not being sarky, I have no idea) How long has the ozone hole been a hole? Is there any evidence there was never a hole? What size is it now, compared to when they raised the alarm after they just found it, considering we've been using Duponts "ozone friendly" patented gas for decades, did it get substantially smaller? I want to start with historical context, what context do we have about before it was discovered?

 

Pumpy:001_cool:

[b101uk]

Don't forget that Shropshire has been at more than one latitude over the last few billion years - not all of those things happened 12 degrees south of the arctic circle!

 

You are quite right, Shropshire like the rest of the UK has been moving, if you do surveying and use GPS you will know the UK on average is moving ~2.5cm per year away from the WSG84 datum while the ETRS89 datum is static over the European plate thus since their respective ellipsoid inceptions which were once on the same datum point are now ~0.55m apart in ~ ¼ of a person’s lifetime.

 

As for latitude change, very true, we have moved, but we have had few ice age here covering what is now the “UK” so our latitude change has not been that major in comparison to our longitude change, we know southern England was at the edge of glacial reach for quite some time due to the mineral deposits being washed out and our climate is a little artificial in comparison to other places of the same latitude, we also know this has been the case more than once!

 

If we look back far enough then any argument about “latitude” etc is defunct anyway as not only dose continents move but the geologic “poles” move, the earth wobbles on its axis vs. the sun and the magnetic field wobbles, moves and sometimes flips ~180 deg so North becomes south and visa-versa and while scientists can make guesses and generalisations its simply not a hard fact that can be nailed down to even a specific century which all compounds any error/s.

 

After all the “scientists” do such a good job of telling use the weather in 1 weeks’ time from what is seemingly a reedy set of known data points available by the hour rather than some potentially obfuscated old data from coring etc whare they “guess” what it was like climate wise etc when there are many geological events that are unknown with major causal effects without including what our star the sun was doing at the time.

[RobArb]

surely, in the earths lifetime on a 24hour clock, our time here would be a couple of seconds to midnight, with the last 30 years a few milli/nano? seconds... climates in that time take TIME to change, no matter how much science is done, we simply do not have the TIMESCALE of evidence to get accurate results in regards to the theory of "climate change"

 

i read an article in a tree magazine the other day that put it simply and clearly and had both for and against arguements against this "change"

 

in a warmer climate, with more CO2, the the trees in tropical region and some to most trees in the temparate regions would thrive with the cooler climes suffering...

 

i'll say again, its a crazy world out there and we know nothing!