On Oct 29, 3:53*pm, Martin Brown
wrote:

It is not an ad hominen attack. It is a statement of fact.

You wear your heart on your sleeve and are determined to interpret
everything as evidence of AGW even when some of it clearly is not.

Well if that is what you think, then it is certainly not worth my time
giving you the facts.

Single events cannot easily be blamed on AGW but the long term trends
can be firmly laid at its door. The problem is that by the time this is
absolutely clear there will be a lot of thermal inertia and a serious
overshoot. Sea level rise is pretty much inevitable now. Certainly plans
are needed to bolster the Thames Barrier if it is not to be overtopped
by a storm surge in the coming century.

There is no political will to do the right thing no matter what the
scientific advice. But the scientific advice that is given must rest on
very firm foundations. You only have to look at the fiasco over the
ludicrous WWF claim about vanishing Himalayan glaciers by 2035 to see
what damage careless claims that are trivial to disprove can do to
scientists credibility. The fact that the glaciers *ARE* retreating and
fairly quickly too has been totally lost in the noise now.

Political will comes from the voters not the scientists. The
scientists have to speak to the people (voters) to get them to put
pressure on the politicians. The best way to do that is through
journalists. Journalists use one liners, and the scientists have to
speak to the journalists in one liners.

The Himalayan glacier fiasco was not an attempt to mislead the public.
It was just one of those accidents that can happen. It seems to have
begun with a misprint of 2035 for 2350, but the IPCC editor should
have known that it was wrong and removed it. In fact I think he was
told but forgot. It is hard to discipline volunteers :-(

What you seem to be missing is there is huge movement, financed by the
oil, coal and automobile industries but really driven by right wing
ideologues in the US who see the IPCC as a UN attempt to take over the
world and remove their FREEDOM! It is as if all Tory Party supporters
had the same beliefs as Lawrence. Or if you realise that they have the
same attitude to Washington that we have to Brussels, so just imagine
their attitude to the UN telling them how much oil they can use!

[I note that you snipped your mad idea and take my comment out of
context here - this is very typical of activists and propagandists]

Your comments were all based on proxies and models not real data.
Since my response would just have been dismissed as "very typical of
activists and propagandists" ther edid not seem much point in
discussing them.

Oh good, does that mean I should ignore those warning from the Met
Office about UV levels?

It will likely make them a bit worse in spring.

So you admit UV does reach the surface?

Cheers, Alastair.