View Single Post
  #61   Report Post  
Old August 7th 19, 03:30 PM posted to uk.sci.weather,uk.d-i-y
Martin Brown[_2_] Martin Brown[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by Weather-Banter: Mar 2017
Posts: 67
Default [CC] UN: Climate disaster predictions from 30 years ago

On 07/08/2019 10:50, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

On 06/08/2019 13:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


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


Prove it! There is a Nobel Prize waiting for anyone who can
demonstrate that the prevailing orthodoxy on climate change is wrong.


Would that that were the case. What is actually waiting for any such
person is the sack, oblivion, and removal of any and all status as a
researcher, including prospects for future grants.


Utter rubbish if they were actually doing real science instead of make
believe fantasy fronting for some ultra-right mostly US think tank.

That is what awaits any nay-sayer of the current orthodoxy (an
interesting word to choose to use, too, I venture to suggest).


I choose my words carefully. I wanted to expose the very specific *LIE*
made in the first sentence that you have quoted from TNP for what it is.

Science is never infallible. If there is a way to demonstrate that AGW
is not caused by CO2 then by all means do so now. Otherwise STFU.

I have previously on several occasions pointed out that I believe that
the exceptional warming seen between the 1970's to 2000 was in part
assisted by a variant of Keeling tides hypothesis (also responsible for
peaks at 1940 and 1880). I have posted this before and interestingly
predicted that around 2020 it will turn back to being steeper again (and
at least a decade ago).

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/inex$20martin$20$202010%7Csort:date/uk.sci.weather/jra4zYOf-yA/3fCsxLsTVaoJ

And

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/martin$20inex$202018/uk.sci.weather/N45CWiHr83w/Hw2zCele4gsJ

There are earlier versions of this post pre 2010, but this one will do.

It is a variant of the Keeling tides argument although them not being
astronomers they didn't pick up the significance of their 58y peak.

I suspect much of the PDO is driven by the 2x Inex periodicity at 58y.
Eclipse sequences at about the same longitude and opposite latitude.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inex

Non-linear oscillations are still the preferred orthodoxy.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown