On Saturday, 20 April 2013 12:26:02 UTC+1, Sutartsorric wrote:
On 2013-04-20 10:49:51 +0000, Lawrence13 said:



On Saturday, 20 April 2013 10:12:25 UTC+1, Alastair wrote:

There is a video here where a climate scientist gives his views of the

state we are in with regards to global warming.



http://vimeo.com/43012713



Of course, those who should watch it won't :-(







Cheers, Alastair.



Before I start am I allowed to take an anti panic view on this topic

without upsetting anyone and being called a right wing fascist? Just

want to get that clear.





Certainly.







The other proviso is that obviously I'm not a scientist and I can't

even write properly but I think I can separate the politics from the

science and here Stefan Rahmstorf seems perfectly rational and as

matter of fact.



First thing that struck me was the major reduction in the amount of

warming expected from a doubling of Co2 which was theorised to be 4-6

Celsius with that now seen in actual practice has been downgraded to

2-4 c so immediately that theory of settled science didn't last that

long.



You seem to have neglected to mention that, it was pointed out the 4-6

C rise was a late 19th century figure, which has been downgraded 120

years later due to a greater understanding of the science.





The other point I note: he talks as if the only driver of climate

change is Co2? The rest is what we already know and have been told for

the last 30 years. There is no mention let alone explanation given for

why the warming has apparently stopped.It stands to reason that before

the additional human release of Co2 into the atmosphere the last

hundred years that the climate was swinging about quite happily on its

own with help from humans who were releasing Co2 in order to survive.

We also know that in the period we are in of ice ages that Co2 has

always followed temperature and *not* the other way round.



Might that be because the latent heat needed to melt vast quantities of

polar ice cap, central Greenland and various large glaciers, has to

come from somewhere? That somewhere is going to be the atmosphere.



If we listen to an actual climate scientist like Dick Lindzen then we

get an opposing point of view as regards the scale of warming and the

doom laden scenarios being associated with it.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1CR0v7dwXU



I agree that the predicted scenario was vastly over-stated in the early

years, mainly because certain infuential scientists came up with a

direct and simple correllation between CO2 emissions and global

temperature increase.



The unusual behaviour of the global temperature graph between 1940 and

1980, and again from 2001 to the present day, illustrates that the

relationship is far more complex than that; but let us not throw the

baby out with the bathwater.



Just because I do not believe the situation is as black as some would

portray it, does not mean that I automatically believe it is white.

There are many shades of grey in-between those two extremes.



Help me out he Who am I talking too now ..Alastair?