On 06/08/2019 11:12, Martin Brown wrote:
On 06/08/2019 09:08, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , JGD
wrote:

On 05/08/2019 22:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
We know that there can be a considerable lag (40-50 years, maybe
more) for a given CO2 level to have its FULL effect on polar ice
melt, sea-level etc.

Hoe ****ing convenient for the climate shysters


Don't you just hate it when those pesky facts get in the way!

Actually no climate scientists says that there will be a 50 year lag.

What, not apart from all of them you mean.

Well even if they did, what of it. Just because Newton or Copernicus or
whichever astronomer it was who first predicted eclipses, did so,
didn't make them right. What made them right was that the eclipses then
*happened*, on time and on budget. And not just once.

The Chinese astronomers had got pretty good at predicting eclipses way
back (as had most other religions). Having the sun go out suddenly
and/or the moon turn blood red would be pretty scary if you didn't know
why. Knowing when gave them a sense of power over things. Many cultures
had something along the lines of Saros and Inex periodicities mapped.

By the time the Jesuits turned up armed with the heretical modern
science (they were early adopters of Copernicism not-withstanding Papal
edicts - and the Vatican observatory is still today very capable) the
resident Chinese astronomers had got sloppy and were beaten. The story
of Ferdinand Verbeist's exploits methods and influence on the Chinese
emperor is well known to us because Chinese wood block prints survive
(as do some of his cannons with Verbiest fecit on them). It is an
interesting story. Not known if there are more wood cuts out there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdin...onomy_contests

A lot of what is known about medieval manufacturing techniques comes
from the extensive collection of Chinese wood block prints.

Einstein's General Relativity was a *hypothesis* until his predictions
were *tested* via the Brazil eclipse of 1919 and the calculations about
the precession of Mercury's orbit. Only after that did his ideas get
elevated to the status of a theory.

It was confirmed by experimental tests - important enough that Eddington
was allowed to prepare for observing it despite Einstein being German.

The same applies to this climate stuff, I'm afraid. And don't try to
fob me off with any cock about what the models *tell* us. Models make
predictions, they don't *tell* us anything.

The models are plenty good enough now to tell us that CO2 and other
trace polyatomic greenhouse gasses are warming the planet.

No, they are not.
They are plenty bad enough to tell us to 3 sigma that whatever is
warming the planet is *not* CO2.

But even teh most rapid warmist will aqdmit that. What warms teh planmet
is teh positive feedback of water vapour, or so they say, which
ampolifies CO2. In their models.

It has been conclusively shown that in the real world, it does not.



Even the canonical deniers for hire admit that - at least when they are
being scientific.

No, they dont. Not to any signicicant extent. Me farting warms the
planet. Lighting a candell warms the planet. Excess CO2 warms the planet
all by insignificant amounts


You cannot balance the Earth's global energy budget
without including greenhouse gas forcing after the 1970's.

You can't balance the Earth's global energy budget
*with* including greenhouse gas forcing after the 1970's.

Something is happening here, but they dont know what it is, do they Mr
Phil Jones (and Michael Mann)


And you cannot magic the sun brighter because it is under constant
satellite surveillance. I suppose you want to deny HADCRUT temperature
data too, but the Berkeley Earth group set out as sceptics and
reproduced it closely with a further extension back to the 1800s.


Why would one want to? teh merest wisp of cloud drops surafec radaiaton
by up to a factor of 8...

It is odd that we have FLIC models for relativistic jets and all sorts
of other exotic phenomena that attract nothing like this level of
hostility. They are still only models but they are now very refined
models that give a pretty good predictions.

Unlike Climate change which gives totally crap predictions.

We are only beginning to see
the effects now. It will be bad for champagne production in France but
good for making it in the southern UK. Our infrastructure is already
showing that it cannot handle the higher rainfall from warm summer heat.


WQe are not seeing any eg=fefcts now at all expoecpt frok greeing in te
sahel due to better paknt grwoth in arid regioiusn

I suppose the interesting question is what will it take before you do
accept that anthropogenic global warming is real?


Well for a start if all its protagonists didnt fly first class to
climate conferences, advocated nuclear power and sold their beachfront
properties I might thinkg that thay at least believed in it.

How many metres of water does Westminster have to be under at high tide?

How many years of record breaking summer heat and flash floods?

Ther are no record breaking summers compared to the MWP or the RWP aor
the holocene optimum. or even the 1930s

Flash flooding is more a result of deforestation and building on flood
plains than weather.


And I am sure some climate scientist assured me that weather is not climate.


--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.