This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Climate change another name for Weather

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yet again you link to an article that just proves weather patterns are dynamic and variable across the globe.
Tiresome, tedious, tripe.
No science.
No understanding (let alone mention) of the underlying concepts.
No idea.
Conviction and beliefs conceived in ignorance.
Keep up the excellent work.[/QUOTE]
You seem to believe yourself as the sole proprietor and adjudicator of all climate knowledge.

I submit that that is ridiculous and you prove yourself tediously biased (tedious being word of the day).

The article, whether or not it has merit, is interesting because of the responses from the public. They're having none of this BS and will eventually vote down any government that goes too far down this path.

A sa matter of fact, Obama will be marked as a failure largely because of his predilection with the AGW hoax, if he carries through with his rhetoric.
 
2020hindsight View Post
hey Spooly ,
I'm still waiting for you to post your opinion of whether or not monitoring the climate and trying to improve the models of its behaviour should (iyo) take prioity over spending on the LH Collider.


Please try to understand the purpose of LHC. A main aspect of that work might even solve the mystery of climate change over centuries. Considering your habit of researching, I leave it to you to present the context of the problem to ASF viewers.

Hint: Sun, Galaxies and cloud formation.
 
You seem to believe yourself as the sole proprietor and adjudicator of all climate knowledge.
I just ask for evidence that man has no impact on the measured temperature increases over the past 100 years. Or that the the skeptics can prove the science has no merit.
 
I just ask for evidence that man has no impact on the measured temperature increases over the past 100 years. Or that the the skeptics can prove the science has no merit.

Rob, it everywhere! It's smacking you in the face!

You just refuse to see it.
 
You've got me at a disadvantage may
I wasn't aware that "a main aspect of that work might solve the mystery of climate change".

hint : how about a link to that effect

PS I'm not against pioneering research like LHC btw - just that I was trying to get spooly to agree that the model for the earth's climate is something that needs all the support and funding it can get - not be the the subject of scorn.
 
Rob, it everywhere! It's smacking you in the face!

You just refuse to see it.
I think you have turned "denial" into an art form.

I ask for proof.
You say it's everywhere.

What is everywhere is a position contrary to yours. Every time you turn on a switch. Every time you jump in a car. Every time you fart.
Yes, climate change is literally coming out of your @rse.
 

Basilio want to inject more of his evangelism into the debate. He thinks the warmers and the dissenters should unite to save the world, To do this of course the dissenters have to admit they are wrong and and accept that the world is otherwise doomed unless we follow their script or the science as Rederob calls it.

He is justified in feeling so self-righteous. The leaders of the Western world now accept the science as a GIVEN along the lines of Mr Rudd's statement back in September.

We must prepare for a low carbon economy, to delay any longer, to stay in denial as the climate change skeptics... would have us do is reckless and irresponsible...for our generation, our kids and future generations we must act now.

I doubt if any of the Western leaders have any dissenting voices on their climate advisory panels They are all guided by the science. Basilio seeks to look at history to justify the warmers crusade.

To don't have to go back too far in history to find cases of where the dismissal of the dissenters arguments lead to tragedy.

The Vietnam war where a string of Presidents believed in the domino theory

The Iraq war where those opposing the weapons of mass destruction theory were ignored.

And the worlds greatest tragedy where millions of well-meaning people all over the world in the 1930s saw Soviet Russia as the Promised Land.

Now that the warmers have have won politically why are they still trying to justify the science?

It took Bush eight years to admit he listened the the wrong advisors.
 

http://ngcblog.nationalgeographic.com/ngcblog/2007/10/solar_force_1.html


http://www.veoh.com/videos/v15494829Z7WqqaJ4
(You might have to install their media player to watch the full version.)
 

Rob,

You've managed to turn this into a dick measuring contest again :sleeping:

I don't really want to put mine anywhere near yours, so ah'm oot.

Ciao
 
Rob,

You've managed to turn this into a dick measuring contest again :sleeping:

I don't really want to put mine anywhere near yours, so ah'm oot.

Ciao
No problem.
It's been a simple request.
Shame you again haven't the capacity to respond with anything meaningful.
And that's after again debunking the nonsense that comes from Monckton. Better that next time he submits his work to peer review rather than shoot himself in the foot with more failings of maths and logic.
I'll wait for Garpal to provide the weather report in Townsville for something meatier than you have put up.
 
Click on this link mates, its a good summary of the debate this year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ar-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html
I do like the UK Telegraph, its such a sensible publication.

Here is the myth of IPCC,
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....90b-bd9faf4dcdb7&CFID=716091&CFTOKEN=88704376
 
Have you watched the Docu? It explains it in layman's term mate.

No I haven't .
I did check the first link , and noted it was nothing to do with the LHC.
So why would I go to the next link?

But in any case, what's your point?

My point is that funding into modelling climate is (at least) equally as important as the funding for the LHC.
 

Watch it mate, It spends about 10-15 minutes explaining LHC and what they want to achieve from it.

I agree with your point of spending money on CG research, but not by fixing the conclusion first. A free spirited research is needed not bounded and controlled by dodge political-scientific organizations. Spend money on alternatives, like studying the impact of Sun, as shown in this documentary.


P.S. veoh player is safe to install, don't be afraid.
 
Click on this link mates, its a good summary of the debate this year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ar-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

I do like the UK Telegraph, its such a sensible publication.


Happy New Year.


gg

An article big on rhetoric and very short on factual substance. Statements prefaced with the word "may"

America has not adopted anything costly to combat global warming, in fact it has adopted nothing.

Large drops in temperature at times has been predicted. Tracts of heat cause extra moisture to rise increasing cloud cover and the intensities of hot and cold air together inceases storms.

The arctic has in fact cleared so much that as recently as a few months ago it is being considered as a new passage for freight tankers.

The only scientists able to get thier grants to publish are those that play the game to big Government. Say what big business wants or no grants pal.
]
The article rounds off by appealing to the hip pocket. The global warming idea is going to send us broke. What is sending us broke are freeway carparks, over indulgence in borrowed money and baby bonuses for unwanted children.

GG, you have to look closer at the content before posting stuff. That was just a load of crap from someone who probably produces oil.
 
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....90b-bd9faf4dcdb7&CFID=716091&CFTOKEN=88704376


Are all of these scientists "crap" rederob?
 

For him I will say yep. Anything out of the UN is suspect for a start, controlled by the US. Japan, again maintains the oil status quo with the US. Some of the statements are segments that are taken out of context.

The is doubt over the whole question, therefore we should be skeptical and err on the side of being prepared for global warming. Alternative measures provide new and exciting opportunities for business. Big change also brings about new and exciting business revolutions. And lets face it fossil fuels are running out or getting too expensive to reach.

Why the fanatical opposition. How about a reasonable approach to new technologies.
 
Click on this link mates, its a good summary of the debate this year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ar-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

I do like the UK Telegraph, its such a sensible publication.


Happy New Year.


gg





There is so much publication bias out there that I wouldn't have the time to sift through it all.

Reason is the first filter I use.

I then discount all normal curves and graphs. They are crap, not enough info.

Mandelbrot and Taleb I listen to.

This guy in the UK Daily Telegraph is as believable as anything else I've seen.

My lighting up a Cohiba in my Monaro is less danger to the earth than these jokers with their particle colliders in Switzerland.

gg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...