On Sep 23, 9:16*am, "Paulus" wrote:
"Lawrence Jenkins" wrote in message

news:00b3eece$0$23838



You do make me laugh Paul, why even the warmist are conceding (due to
reality sinking the models) that we are heading for a cooling period with
of course AGW to return in earnest 10-16 years down the line.

What ever next , deferred warming?

There is often talk of "feedback" mechanisms and "tipping points" in the
Global Warming Industry.
Well, they are there for sure and will show themselves in a manner not quite
expected
by those in it's employment.

At some point soon the penny will drop. Some high priest of AGW will notice
that it is they who have their neck
in the noose and get a chill of realisation down their spine.

The tone will change abruptly. A tipping point will be reached. The big
money will go elsewhere. The whole house of cards will tumble at a
frightening speed. Heads will roll.

And I'll remind y'all that I told you so.

Tick Tock, Tick Tock.......

Paul

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/M...t/message/3322

"Dawlish" wrote in message
...
..........Snip.....

I don't deny that climate change is happening. Indeed, I don't believe there
has ever been a period in Earth's history when it hasn't been changing -
even on the scale of decades.

What I don't accept is that, whatever the climate is doing, we can
control it in any meaningfull manner. What effect, if any, human activity
is having on global temperatures may or may not be measurable. It may
or may not have a negative effect on human welfare.

You will be aware that the promised global catastrophe looks no
more likely now than it did 10 years ago. In fact, it looks less likely.

What about graphs and trends?
Well, the problem with those is that we have two types of data.
Modern satellite and real time high precision instrument data and
the fudged proxy/guess work historical "data". Mixing and matching
the two is quite dishonest.

If you go forward in time
a thousand years and try and ascertain todays global temperatures
by the same methods that are being used today to ascertain
temperatures from a thousand years ago, do you think
that the claimed recent 0.5 degree of warming will
be discernable?

I'm not sure at all that it would be.

And another thing. I don't think we should sit round
and do nothing. What we should be doing is addressing
the real environmental issues. That is something that the politicians
need to be honest with themselves about. They are readily resolvable
with a smaller human population.

What I do deny is politicians the right to impose arbitary
restrictions and taxes in the name of misguided low carbon policy.
Even if Europe and the US stopped producing CO2 overnight
there will still be more than enough being pumped into the
atmosphere to keep us headed toward oblivion. At least if the
Global Warming Industy's original model of atmospheric green
house gases is to be believed.

For now I'll cling to my "told you so" scenario.

Tick Tock........

Paul

"RWood" wrote in message
...


http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/M...t/message/3322

Funny how all the most frightening research is published just as one of the
Global
Warming Industies vulgar jamborees is being publicised.

If it carries on at this rate they'll have to bring Copenhagen forward so as
there will still be a Copenhagen left for them to attend.

Tick Tock....

Paul

On Sep 23, 10:44*pm, "Paulus" wrote:
"RWood" wrote in message

...

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/M...t/message/3322

Funny how all the most frightening research is published just as one of the
Global
Warming Industies vulgar jamborees is being publicised.

If it carries on at this rate they'll have to bring Copenhagen forward so as
there will still be a Copenhagen left for them to attend.

Tick Tock....

Paul

They have. It's called the climate summit at the UN.

*))

In article ,
says...

[...]

You will be aware that the promised global catastrophe looks no
more likely now than it did 10 years ago. In fact, it looks less likely.

10 years ago the "promised" global catastrophe was 80-100 years away. 15
years ago it was 200 years away. Today it is 40 years away.

On the grounds the the timeframes are constantly being revised shorter
and shorter, I think most of the AGW crowd would claim it is more
likely.

[...]


--
Alan LeHun