Climategate Is Still The Issue

[Slim]

what i disagree with is that they say its all man made, which while yes MAYBE some of it is, But the earth still has cold and warm sectors in its life.

 

whos to say this is no more than a normal cycle of the earth.

You can present date after date of how man have effected it,

But theres so much that does not add up,

 

So i stick on the side of its a earth cycle

 

Oh for craps sake...

[Ringwraith]

what i disagree with is that they say its all man made, which while yes MAYBE some of it is, But the earth still has cold and warm sectors in its life.

 

whos to say this is no more than a normal cycle of the earth.

You can present date after date of how man have effected it,

But theres so much that does not add up,

 

So i stick on the side of its a earth cycle

 

Record low temperatures being recorded around the world and you don't believe in global warming, what's wrong with you?

 

Oh yes, that's WEATHER not climate! FFS you couldn't make it up.

 

At least we won't have to suffer any more hot air from that eco-nazi ffffffinlo costain in Manx tails anymore though, apart from Slimy he probably pissed off every social group on the island with his rants.

[Slim]

FFS you couldn't make it up.

 

Oh, I imagine you could, Ringwraith.

 

You're comparing short term weather patterns, not longer term climate trends. It's pretty basic, but you've shown an accute failure to understand such things up to now, so I doubt that's going to change any time soon.

 

This is presented quite well, surprisingly, in the Daily Mirror:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/12/17/is-this-record-cold-snap-caused-by-global-warming-115875-22789437/

 

Have a read.

[pongo]

Ringwraith.

 

You're comparing short term weather patterns, not longer term climate trends. It's pretty basic,

 

Exactly. Long term weather trends (centuries) show that the climate is cyclical in general but very difficult to predict.

 

Meanwhile arch weather zealots seem to be moving towards intervention - this new research into an old subject backed as usual by the US military. Eg see Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025

 

http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

[Terse]

LINK

 

There is no "tipping point" beyond which climate change will inevitably push the Arctic ice cap into terminal melt off, according to a study released Wednesday.

 

There is no 'tipping point' that would result in unstoppable loss of summer sea ice when greenhouse gas-driven warming rose above a certain threshold," said Steven Amstrup, a professor at the University of Washington and lead author of the study.

 

Up to now, many scientists worried that there was an as yet unidentified temperature threshold which, once passed, would doom the ice cap.

 

But the study, based on computer models, indicates that if annual emissions of greenhouse gases are substantially reduced over the next two decades, an initial phase of rapid ice loss would be followed by a period of stability and, eventually, partial recovery.

 

If so, that could mean a reprieve for polar bears, which use floating ice shelves as a staging areas for stalking ringed and bearded seals, their preferred food.

 

P.S. I've put this link in to be informative - not to cause contention!

[Ringwraith]

 

Oh, I imagine you could, Ringwraith.

 

Nah, I'm not a psychotic control freak.

 

You're comparing short term weather patterns, not longer term climate trends. It's pretty basic, but you've shown an accute failure to understand such things up to now, so I doubt that's going to change any time soon.

 

No I'm not, climate is cyclical and the main driver is the sun.

 

And I fully understand the con job that's being sold, I'm just not falling for it.

 

This is presented quite well, surprisingly, in the Daily Mirror:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/12/17/is-this-record-cold-snap-caused-by-global-warming-115875-22789437/

 

Have a read.

 

No thanks, keep your fairytales to yourself.

[Slim]

Pongo, I'm really struggling to find the point of your post.

LINK

There is no "tipping point" beyond which climate change will inevitably push the Arctic ice cap into terminal melt off, according to a study released Wednesday.

 

P.S. I've put this link in to be informative - not to cause contention!

 

That study is great news, shows that taking action is worthwhile.

 

Ringwraith, you're so clever. Far smarter than all those so-called scientists! Follow the money man!

[Chinahand]

More on how sea ice extent and the cold weather in Europe are inversely correlated.

 

Link

 

This week, freezing temperatures and lots of snow wreacked havoc across Europe, stranding many holiday travelers. But on the other side of the Atlantic, some equally unusual weather has kept parts of Hudson Bay from freezing over, causing the growth in Arctic sea ice to come to a halt.

 

.. the change [in the weather system of the Arctic Sea] has left us with the lowest ice levels at this date since they've been recorded by satellite.

 

the current weather might be connected with long-term trends in the Arctic. The intense high pressure over Greenland is associated with a strong low pressure area a bit northeast of Iceland. That will tend to pull ice out of the Arctic, and may contribute to the ongoing decline of thicker, multi-year ice. The thinner ice that's replacing it is more prone to melting rapidly in the summer.

 

There's also a chance that the loss of sea ice is feeding back into the system. Serreze said that the research community was beginning to suspect that the lack of sea ice allows the oceans to pump heat into the atmosphere in the Arctic in a way that could impact local weather, including the North Atlantic Oscillation.

 

Two years of cold weather in Europe is a very poor trend! No doubt there will be a lot more science done, but the decline in sea ice is now a decades long trend and so it having follow on effects isn't that odd.

[pongo]

Yes climate and weather patterns and trends are not predictable and can only really be observed of many centuries and millennia.

 

There is still more ice now in Greenland than there was 800 years ago. Then it got much colder. The Thames used to freeze . That stopped happening long before industrialization.

[gazza]

Yes climate and weather patterns and trends are not predictable and can only really be observed of many centuries and millennia.

 

There is still more ice now in Greenland than there was 800 years ago. Then it got much colder. The Thames used to freeze . That stopped happening long before industrialization.

 

no no no, dont use facts.

 

Life is a cycle the earth is a cycle,

it warms it gets hot, it gos cold and goss around, its what earth does,

 

its proven time and time again that it heats up then cools,

 

Why is this so hard to understand, and why does everyone think this is so bad.

[Chinahand]

Pongo - are you saying that it is impossible to estimate what will happen if there is a doubling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere?

 

Or do you think it is possible to make reasoned predictions with error bars, uncertainty estimates etc based on the known physics of gases, water vapour etc.

[pongo]

WikiLeaks cables reveal how US manipulated climate accord (The Guardian)

[Chinahand]

Pongo - I believe you've posted that link before - I fully understand that the process to attempt to mitigate the effects of (amoungst other things) doubling the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is going to involve lots of geopolitical jiggery pockery.

 

But that isn't the issue here - there's climate science - attempting to understand the world's atmosphere and how it changes both naturally and from anthropogenic causes. And then there is the question of what should be made of the conclusions this science has come to.

 

The second part is massively contested, but very few reputable scientists working on the subject disagree over the first - Roy Spencer and Richard Lindzen are about the only publishing doubters and they are pretty boxed in as the science advances. Its not impossible 98% of climate scientists are wrong, but basically there are very few mechanisms to counter the additional green house effect doubling CO2 causes.

 

Cloud feedbacks don't seem to be doing it.

 

Any effect that would cancel out manmade warming would also have cancelled out natural cycles and our knowledge of ice-ages etc simply doesn't show any such affect. CO2 has doubled previously (its basically a logarithmic effect so any doubling will produce a similar feedback) and so scientists can with reasonable bounds predict the change - 2 to 5 degrees of warming is highly likely, and that level will have definite real effects on the earth's ecology.

 

Do you really discount all that science because the US tried to get its way at a climate conference.

 

Why?

[pongo]

Pongo - are you saying that it is impossible to estimate what will happen if there is a doubling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere?

 

If it happens we will find out. The planet will still be here long after we are gone.

 

Do you really discount all that science because the US tried to get its way at a climate conference.

 

No you cannot make that connection.

 

FWIW what the link underscores is that the global warming political agenda is utterly about the flow of money and where it ends up. As the Guardian article says:

 

re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.

 

That does not mean that the scientists are wrong (or right). But what it definitely means is that all of this this is ultimately a trade negotiation in which nobody can be trusted. The public seems to be utterly brainwashed however. The panic mongers have already won the hearts and minds.

[Slim]

If it happens we will find out. The planet will still be here long after we are gone.

 

An interesting approach. Perhaps we should take the same view with road safety. Close your eyes and play in the traffic. If you get splattered you'll find out, the road will still be there when you're gone!