On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:49:49 UTC, Adam Lea wrote:
On 11/02/2014 12:33, Martin Brown wrote: On 11/02/2014 11:18, Joe Egginton wrote: On 11/02/2014 11:02, matt_sykes wrote: On Sunday, 9 February 2014 22:04:49 UTC+1, Dawlish wrote: There will never be proof.. That's because this is science. Something the rest of your rant shows you simply don't understand. ROFL, so what you're saying Dullish is that science is based on faith. Science is all about evidence and proof.. What he is saying is that *proof* is only possible in mathematics. You cannot prove a scientific hypothesis in the strict sense of the word. In science you can easily disprove a hypothesis or theory by finding an experiment where the experimental results disagree with the predictions of the theory. It doesn't matter how many experiments you do that have theory and experimental results matching you never prove it. There is always the possibility that someone will find a clever experiment that breaks the standard models of the day in a novel and unexpected way. Usually such novel experiments that overthrow the scientific status quo are ground breaking and paradigm shifting like Becquerel discovering radioactivity, the Michelson-Moreley experiment (relativity), Hertz with the photoelectric effect (quantum mechanics) and Penzias & Wilson observing the microwave background (Big Bang). You can demonstrate that the likelihood that a scientific theory is correct increases with every independent and more sensitive test that the theoretical model passes but it is never absolute proof. There is no absolute proof in science only a progressively better and better approximation to reality. We codify things that we believe are so nearly true as to make no difference as the laws of physics but they are always subject to later revision when better data comes along. Hard experimental results always trump theory when they conflict. By comparison dittohead right whingers are absolutely convinced and cock sure that we can trash the planet with impunity for fun and profit. You can't attribute any one weather event to AGW but on the other hand when you have had a run of "hundred year" storms in quick succession you have to wonder how many more it will take before the lying dittoheads finally admit defeat. Nature is the final arbiter on this! Still with the Tory heartlands now flooding they will have to pay some attention to mitigating climate change instead of pretending that it isn't happening. "Vote blue get green" slogan is looking very dodgy now. Well said, however I would exercise caution in any claims that the current flooding is related to climate change before any attribution study has been conducted. Otherwise, it is no different to claiming that the run of cold winters in the UK prior to this year demonstrates a cooling trend. There are some interesting rainfall statistics for wet seasons posted on the UKWW forum: Wettest seasons on record for England+Wales: Autumn 502.7mm 2000 455.8mm 1852 438.6mm 1960 424.1mm 1935 402.4mm 1770 400.6mm 1772 399.1mm 1875 398.7mm 1768 396.8mm 1799 394.3mm 1872 391.1mm 1903 387.9mm 1825 384.6mm 1841 379.1mm 1880 378.9mm 1773 378..1mm 1954 377.8mm 1794 377.5mm 1944 Summer 409.7mm 1912 409.2mm 1879 396.3mm 1829 375.2mm 2012 Winter 423.0mm 1914-15 420.9mm 1989-90 418.3mm 1876-77 415.6mm 1994-95 388.3mm 1993-94 380.6mm 1868-69 374.3mm 1959-60 372.8mm 2013-14 up to 9th Feb As can be seen, there have been several wet seasons historically going back to the 18th century, and the current winter rainfall is far from unprecedented.

Thanks for that, Adam - interesting figures. The unusual thing about this winter is the rainfall in the south. This will be only partly reflected in the EWR figures, obviously.

My own figures are exceptional. The mean for DJF (30 years) here is 233 mm and the highest so far is 1989-90 with 420 mm but this season I have had 492.4 and would guess the final total to be at least 520 mm.

Of course our occasional river, the Caterham Bourne, has risen as it did in 2001 and flooded quite a few houses and businesses. The A22 is closed and will be so for some time.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, NE Surrey, 556 ft.