Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) (uk.sci.weather) For the discussion of daily weather events, chiefly affecting the UK and adjacent parts of Europe, both past and predicted. The discussion is open to all, but contributions on a practical scientific level are encouraged. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Feb, 18:05, Dawlish wrote:
On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then, rather than ranting. Then someone who counts might believe you and yours. You can refer to whatever politically inspired thing that you wish, but until temperatures begin to decrease, very few scientists will believe as you do - about Joe *******i's forecasting prowess, or GW. Just present some evidence of global cooling having started next time you post, or research Joe B's track record yourself and show us that his past forecasting success demonstrates that really is a LRF guru. If you believe in what you do so strongly that you feel the need to constantly tell us your views are correct, that's *all* you have to do to convince. That's surely very easy? Look, I am not a scientist - never pretended to be, nor have a said that the planet hasn't warmed - of course it has, we're only just exiting the last glaciation. What I AM saying, is that any warming has not been due to man's influence, particularly in relation to the demon carbon dioxide. I believe that other chaotic factors are at work driving the climate, not least the effect of the sun. I also believe that the current lack of solar activity may well prove to be the commencement of another minimum, which will result in planetary cooling, and this process has probably already started. I don't need to provide evidence, because it's all around. I'm old enough to appreciate subtle changes, and I can glean all I need to know from the internet, as can you, and the message which comes stridently across to me is that almost everything so far published by those organs and "authorities" who would have us believe otherwise, is corrupted with fake data, extracts from magazines and dodgy modeling, to serve some other purpose than pure science. I find the independently published science that I'VE seen far more convincing than anything to the contrary, and judging by the increasingly adverse publicity, and the attempts to defend themselves, the IPCC and others are merely serving to compound their felonies. Even the Guardian is wavering! So I don't need to justify either myself, or my beliefs - suffice it to say, the pendulum is swinging, and you and your ilk will eventually become the minority shouting in the wilderness. You only have to look at how things have shifted over less than twelve months to realise that opinion is fast reversing. If you consider that a rant, well, sorry, but accusations appear to be your only remaining defence. I can take it, it's like water off a duck's back to me, but it'll take more than you to shake my long-held beliefs - maybe it is you that needs to provide evidence, because so far most of the warmist's arguments are dissolving like ice in a kiln. CK |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 5:49*pm, Natsman wrote:
On 4 Feb, 18:05, Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then, rather than ranting. Then someone who counts might believe you and yours. You can refer to whatever politically inspired thing that you wish, but until temperatures begin to decrease, very few scientists will believe as you do - about Joe *******i's forecasting prowess, or GW. Just present some evidence of global cooling having started next time you post, or research Joe B's track record yourself and show us that his past forecasting success demonstrates that really is a LRF guru. If you believe in what you do so strongly that you feel the need to constantly tell us your views are correct, that's *all* you have to do to convince. That's surely very easy? Look, I am not a scientist - never pretended to be, nor have a said that the planet hasn't warmed - of course it has, we're only just exiting the last glaciation. *What I AM saying, is that any warming has not been due to man's influence, particularly in relation to the demon carbon dioxide. *I believe that other chaotic factors are at work driving the climate, not least the effect of the sun. *I also believe that the current lack of solar activity may well prove to be the commencement of another minimum, which will result in planetary cooling, and this process has probably already started. *I don't need to provide evidence, because it's all around. *I'm old enough to appreciate subtle changes, and I can glean all I need to know from the internet, as can you, and the message which comes stridently across to me is that almost everything so far published by those organs and "authorities" who would have us believe otherwise, is corrupted with fake data, extracts from magazines and dodgy modeling, to serve some other purpose than pure science. *I find the independently published science that I'VE seen far more convincing than anything to the contrary, and judging by the increasingly adverse publicity, and the attempts to defend themselves, the IPCC and others are merely serving to compound their felonies. *Even the Guardian is wavering! So I don't need to justify either myself, or my beliefs - suffice it to say, the pendulum is swinging, and you and your ilk will eventually become the minority shouting in the wilderness. *You only have to look at how things have shifted over less than twelve months to realise that opinion is fast reversing. *If you consider that a rant, well, sorry, but accusations appear to be your only remaining defence. *I can take it, it's like water off a duck's back to me, but it'll take more than you to shake my long-held beliefs - maybe it is you that needs to provide evidence, because so far most of the warmist's arguments are dissolving like ice in a kiln. CK- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, it's another rant, with no evidence for cooling whatsoever. That's all you and yours have to do Natsman; show us it's cooling, or not surprisingly the sensible and overwhelming scientific majority won't think it is. I don't think I could provide you with more evidence of continued warming and the lack of cooling. Read what I posted. You, on the other hand, as always, have provided precisely no facts whatsoever. I've shown you clear evidence of continued warming and if it's not cooling now during an extended solar minimum and a negative PDO (and it didn't even cool when these two were combined with a La Nina a year ago)........what's the likely cause of the warmth? Most scientists think the most likely cause is CO2, because they look at all this evidence, weigh it up and come to their own conclusions. You and a few others come to different conclusions, but goodness knows how in the face of all this. |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dawlish wrote:
On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... -- Brian Wakem |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Brian Wakem" wrote in message ... Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49 pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. No it shows that tree growth has slowed down. That can be due to colder temperatures, but also drier weather or an increase in pests or something else. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? Which ones are real and which are being massaged? Yes that is a problem. There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... It's so sad that money is involved in the science with people even betting on outcomes :-( Will -- |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 6:16*pm, Brian Wakem wrote:
Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. *Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? *Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... -- Brian Wakem If Hadley have "hidden the decline" Brian, then so have GISS, NASA, RSS and UAH, as all these series corroborate the fact that temperatures have risen - and the latter global temperature data source is run by a GW sceptic, Roy Spencer. Would he really have become embroiled in this enormous conspiracy? As a result, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the 5 temperature series *are* to be believed - or one high profile sceptic must have been lying along with all the other scientists involved in the compilation of the global temperature series. The conspiracy theory that the temperature series have been massaged just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 6:16*pm, Brian Wakem wrote:
Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. *Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? *Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... -- Brian Wakem I think you are repeating climate Audit percieved wisdom with the tree ring data Brian and it's important to challenge misconceptions like this. It is Briffa's research for the CRU that I think you are referring to (2008). This was Briffa's own response to the misrepresentation of his data, written in September of last year: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2000/ Please note, especially, the last sentence, in which Briffa clearly says that the conclusions from his research most certainly was not what you posted ("The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s"). : "We have not yet had a chance to explore the details of McIntyre's analysis or its implication for temperature reconstruction at Yamal but we have done considerably more analyses exploring chronology production and temperature calibration that have relevance to this issue but they are not yet published. I do not believe that McIntyre's preliminary post provides sufficient evidence to doubt the reality of unusually high summer temperatures in the last decades of the 20th century." K.R. Briffa 30 Sept 2009 i.e. the tree ring data that Hadley's CRU have shows nothing else but that temperatures have *risen*. not fallen, in the last decades of the 20th century. |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Feb, 20:04, Dawlish wrote:
On Feb 4, 6:16*pm, Brian Wakem wrote: Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. *Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? *Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... -- Brian Wakem I think you are repeating climate Audit percieved wisdom with the tree ring data Brian and it's important to challenge misconceptions like this. It is Briffa's research for the CRU that I think you are referring to (2008). This was Briffa's own response to the misrepresentation of his data, written in September of last year: *http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2000/ Please note, especially, the last sentence, in which Briffa clearly says that the conclusions from his research most certainly was not what you posted ("The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s"). : "We have not yet had a chance to explore the details of McIntyre's analysis or its implication for temperature reconstruction at Yamal but we have done considerably more analyses exploring chronology production and temperature calibration that have relevance to this issue but they are not yet published. I do not believe that McIntyre's preliminary post provides sufficient evidence to doubt the reality of unusually high summer temperatures in the last decades of the 20th century." K.R. Briffa 30 Sept 2009 i.e. the tree ring data that Hadley's CRU have shows nothing else but that temperatures have *risen*. not fallen, in the last decades of the 20th century.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dawlish, old son, you're on to a loser, I'm afraid. I would just sit tight for a while, and see what happens, if I were you. The whole damned lot of them are corrupt, and only interested in their own dogma. We all know it's a scam, we all know we're not going to hell on a handcart, and we all know that a cooling world is less preferable to a warming one, and if the powers that be take the wrong course (which they apparently are), the resulting economic disaster which results from trying to fix things wot aint broke, will be solely down to them (and you). CK CK |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 4, 7:22*pm, Natsman wrote:
On 4 Feb, 20:04, Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 6:16*pm, Brian Wakem wrote: Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49*pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. *Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? *Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. *Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? *Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... -- Brian Wakem I think you are repeating climate Audit percieved wisdom with the tree ring data Brian and it's important to challenge misconceptions like this. It is Briffa's research for the CRU that I think you are referring to (2008). This was Briffa's own response to the misrepresentation of his data, written in September of last year: *http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2000/ Please note, especially, the last sentence, in which Briffa clearly says that the conclusions from his research most certainly was not what you posted ("The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s"). : "We have not yet had a chance to explore the details of McIntyre's analysis or its implication for temperature reconstruction at Yamal but we have done considerably more analyses exploring chronology production and temperature calibration that have relevance to this issue but they are not yet published. I do not believe that McIntyre's preliminary post provides sufficient evidence to doubt the reality of unusually high summer temperatures in the last decades of the 20th century." K.R. Briffa 30 Sept 2009 i.e. the tree ring data that Hadley's CRU have shows nothing else but that temperatures have *risen*. not fallen, in the last decades of the 20th century.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Dawlish, old son, you're on to a loser, I'm afraid. *I would just sit tight for a while, and see what happens, if I were you. The whole damned lot of them are corrupt, and only interested in their own dogma. *We all know it's a scam, we all know we're not going to hell on a handcart, and we all know that a cooling world is less preferable to a warming one, and if the powers that be take the wrong course (which they apparently are), the resulting economic disaster which results from trying to fix things wot aint broke, will be solely down to them (and you). CK CK- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - That's quite a rant even for you. Now where's that evidence of cooling that I'd asked you for? To his great credit, Brian at least tried to provide some. You simply cannot. The *only* measure of global warming are global temperatures. You'd like it to be measured in all sorts of ways, mainly political and wholly unrelated to temperatures, but it can't be. I'll repeat for you: global warming is measured by global temperatures alone and by nothing else. Simple really. So; all you have to do to convince is to provide evidence of JB's forecasting prowess over time (the thread title), or evidence of global cooling - or you could just go on ignoring the facts and continue to rant about al the things that you don't like, but which have nothing to do with GW, as GW is about temperatures; not politics. I wonder which of those you will do? |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
all, dont waste your breath.
joe b = meteorologist dawlish = armchair wannabe betting weather forecaster. nuff said. Natsman wrote: On 4 Feb, 18:05, Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49 pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then, rather than ranting. Then someone who counts might believe you and yours. You can refer to whatever politically inspired thing that you wish, but until temperatures begin to decrease, very few scientists will believe as you do - about Joe *******i's forecasting prowess, or GW. Just present some evidence of global cooling having started next time you post, or research Joe B's track record yourself and show us that his past forecasting success demonstrates that really is a LRF guru. If you believe in what you do so strongly that you feel the need to constantly tell us your views are correct, that's *all* you have to do to convince. That's surely very easy? Look, I am not a scientist - never pretended to be, nor have a said that the planet hasn't warmed - of course it has, we're only just exiting the last glaciation. What I AM saying, is that any warming has not been due to man's influence, particularly in relation to the demon carbon dioxide. I believe that other chaotic factors are at work driving the climate, not least the effect of the sun. I also believe that the current lack of solar activity may well prove to be the commencement of another minimum, which will result in planetary cooling, and this process has probably already started. I don't need to provide evidence, because it's all around. I'm old enough to appreciate subtle changes, and I can glean all I need to know from the internet, as can you, and the message which comes stridently across to me is that almost everything so far published by those organs and "authorities" who would have us believe otherwise, is corrupted with fake data, extracts from magazines and dodgy modeling, to serve some other purpose than pure science. I find the independently published science that I'VE seen far more convincing than anything to the contrary, and judging by the increasingly adverse publicity, and the attempts to defend themselves, the IPCC and others are merely serving to compound their felonies. Even the Guardian is wavering! So I don't need to justify either myself, or my beliefs - suffice it to say, the pendulum is swinging, and you and your ilk will eventually become the minority shouting in the wilderness. You only have to look at how things have shifted over less than twelve months to realise that opinion is fast reversing. If you consider that a rant, well, sorry, but accusations appear to be your only remaining defence. I can take it, it's like water off a duck's back to me, but it'll take more than you to shake my long-held beliefs - maybe it is you that needs to provide evidence, because so far most of the warmist's arguments are dissolving like ice in a kiln. CK |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thursday 04 Feb 2010 18:16, Brian Wakem scribbled:
Dawlish wrote: On Feb 4, 4:49 pm, Natsman wrote: Not a rant, comrade, just telling it like it is. And just for good measure I note with interest, and I confess, a degree of satisfaction, that India are pulling out of the IPCC. Could this be the thin end of the wedge, I wonder? Who knows... CK Present some evidence that temperatures are decreasing then The tree ring data from Siberia that the CRU have shows temperatures decreasing since the 60s. Or rather it did before they decided to 'hide the decline'. Tree ring data doesn't just depend on temperature, rainfall is also important. I had a few doubts back in the 60s when I heard about tree-ring width depended just on temperature but thought these guys must know more than me. Seems now that someone reckons that if you get a really hot, dry summer, the trees don't grow very much. Who'd 'a' tho't it? I don't believe for one minute that the temperature is lower now than in the 60s but how do we know which figures to believe? Which ones are real and which are being massaged? There's too many £trillions betting on run away global warming now so the figures will show it happening regardless... So did someone from the Climate Centre go up to the Arctic with a large blowtorch in 2007 and melt the ice? It's not only temperature records that show the Earth has warmed. -- Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks., UK. E-mail: newsman not newsboy "I wear the cheese. It does not wear me." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
WSI update, cold winter still on, but not as bad as last year | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Joe Bastardi says 'UPDATE ON COMING COLD WAVE' | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Winter Storm Archive update: Winter storms 2007 | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Joe's update | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Winter Outlook Update: Winter Weather Still Promising Much Variablity | Latest News |