Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.

"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.

"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this necessarily to some global picture.

"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."

http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming

SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!

On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 16:46:36 UTC+1, Jim Cannon wrote:
Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.



"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.



"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this necessarily to some global picture.



"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming



SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!

Many of them should be sacked, Jones included. They are nto scientists, they are liars, and oddly, they think they are getting away with it, thats the extraordinary thing, they think we cant see throuigh it all.

On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:18:33 PM UTC, Malcolm wrote:
In article , Jim

Cannon writes





Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of

climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.



"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is

just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their

own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.



"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a

global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this

necessarily to some global picture.



"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...awson-met-offi

ce-floods-global-warming



SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!



Try reading this about Lord Lawson and decide whether he is an entirely

independent commentator on global warming. You might also like to

compare his scientific qualifications with those of Julia Slingo.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_...icy_Foundation



--

Malcolm

Nothing would convince these people that they may not be correct. It's a form of cognitive dissonance. They know what they believe is highly unlikely to happen, yet they know it will happen and will not in any way acknowledge the low likelihood that their beliefs will prove correct, even though almost every scientist on the planet says they are wrong and every scientific institution on earth tells them the same.

Despite this and despite their generally poor levels of; understanding and knowledge about the subject, intelligence and even grasp of English, they know they are better informed than all these other people, who they take every opportunity to denigrate and attack.

Weird, but true.

"Dawlish" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:18:33 PM UTC, Malcolm wrote:
In article , Jim

Cannon writes





Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of

climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.



"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is

just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their

own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.



"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a

global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this

necessarily to some global picture.



"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...awson-met-offi

ce-floods-global-warming



SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!



Try reading this about Lord Lawson and decide whether he is an entirely

independent commentator on global warming. You might also like to

compare his scientific qualifications with those of Julia Slingo.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_...icy_Foundation



--

Malcolm

Nothing would convince these people that they may not be correct. It's a
form of cognitive dissonance. They know what they believe is highly unlikely
to happen, yet they know it will happen and will not in any way acknowledge
the low likelihood that their beliefs will prove correct, even though almost
every scientist on the planet says they are wrong and every scientific
institution on earth tells them the same.

Despite this and despite their generally poor levels of; understanding and
knowledge about the subject, intelligence and even grasp of English, they
know they are better informed than all these other people, who they take
every opportunity to denigrate and attack.

Weird, but true.



I wonder if Niger Lawson understands the chaotic nature of the Earth's
atmosphere. What is worrying for the future Earth is that nobody can
reliably predict how the atmosphere will react to any changes imposed on it.
Chaotic systems can suddenly change dramatically as a result of a very
modest initial perturbation, and the atmosphere is, without doubt, being
perturbated.

--
Bernard Burton

Wokingham Berkshire.

Weather data and satellite images at:
http://www.woksat.info/wwp.html

On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 15:46:36 UTC, Jim Cannon wrote:
Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.



"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.



"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this necessarily to some global picture.



"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...global-warming



SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!



And there's me thinking that Hyacinth Garve'y said that no scientist had said the the several thousand homes flooded on a previous swamp/floodplain had been blamed on AGW. What a fool I've been.

On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 19:18:33 UTC, Malcolm wrote:
In article , Jim

Cannon writes





Lawson made it clear he has not changed his mind about the effects of

climate change, arguing bad weather is nothing new.



"You'll see the Met Office's own report denies it," he said. "It is

just this Julia Slingo woman, who made this absurd statement, but their

own official statement makes it clear there is no proven link whatever.



"There's been bad weather before. And anyhow, climate change is a

global phenomenon, and you don't attribute local things like this

necessarily to some global picture.



"The fact is, there is no evidence whatever to link it."



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...awson-met-offi

ce-floods-global-warming



SHE SHOULD BE SACKED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!



Try reading this about Lord Lawson and decide whether he is an entirely

independent commentator on global warming. You might also like to

compare his scientific qualifications with those of Julia Slingo.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_...icy_Foundation



--

Malcolm

Please tell me Hyacinth Sock why you still insist on ensuring your alter ego posts are deleted?

Actually I believe I've answered my own question. Doh........

On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 20:05:04 UTC, Bernard Burton wrote:

Chaotic systems can suddenly change dramatically as a result of a very
modest initial perturbation, and the atmosphere is, without doubt, being
perturbed.

Surely the fact that systems are chaotic demonstrates the absurdity of climate models?

Or is the hockey stick idiocy non linear?
Pile in men, let's get them while they are on their own hook.

Yes you have and you are still. That's no-one's fault but your own.

The Australian climate troll declined my challenge to put his case at Hot Topic - what a surprise. None of the anti-AGW types here would risk it either, I reckon. Anthony Violi has been spouting rubbish for years.

On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 21:06:28 UTC, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 20:05:04 UTC, Bernard Burton wrote: Chaotic systems can suddenly change dramatically as a result of a very modest initial perturbation, and the atmosphere is, without doubt, being perturbed.

Surely the fact that systems are chaotic demonstrates the absurdity of climate models? Or is the hockey stick idiocy non linear? Pile in men, let's get them while they are on their own hook.

There is such a thing as bounded chaos and it is a well-known mathematical concept. The solar system is an example. The orbits of the planets could be anywhere within a fairly well-defined volume of space given long enough, but the planets will not escape neither will their orbits intersect.

The atmosphere is chaotic on various time-scales and to differing degrees and the value of climate models is to predict a shifting mean around which the normal chaos takes place. The atmosphere, though chaotic, will always have an "attractor", maybe more than one, and it is the purpose of climate models to try and forecast where this will be.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.