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 |
#42
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, 7 January 2020 09:48:46 UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 9:24:17 AM UTC, Spike wrote: On 06/01/2020 10:46, Graham Easterling wrote: On Monday, January 6, 2020 at 9:12:26 AM UTC, Spike wrote: On 05/01/2020 12:02, Keith Harris wrote: All it's doing is just delaying action and as each year goes by it is just getting progressively worse. We can see what's happening around the world, how bad has it got to get? "It" appears to have got bad enough that the climate catastrophe industry now has to be fronted by a schoolgirl variously described as Aspergic, OCD-suffering, and depressive, rather than in this case by scientists proving that their climate models have finally matched the reality. I kept out of this until now as my views are well known on USW, and the thread was sadly deteriorating. The thread started to deteriorate when Paul Garvey posted a link to Spencer's page and said "There's always one". However, as someone involved with the subject you have raised (I have an autistic daughter), to attack someone with conviction because she is aspergic has crossed a line for me. People with aspergers are typically of above average intelligence and tend to focus on 1 subject, Chris Packham is a well known example. So they are worth listening to. I didn't attack her, but merely noted characteristics that in turn have been mentioned by her supporters, such as the following from the family's book: "After years of depression, eating disorders, and anxiety attacks, she finally receives a medical diagnosis: Asperger’s syndrome, high-functioning autism, and OCD. She also suffers from selective mutism—which explains why she sometimes can’t speak to anyone outside her closest family". The book is available on Amazon, if you don't already have a copy. But in any case convictions are quite irrelevant here. This is not a religion, it is a scientific subject. To dismiss her so rather displays a side of you I hadn't spotted before. I doubt she could offer any scientific-based comment or insight more significant than "We need that line to bend down" into the data or analysis contained in Spencer's graph, which was the point of my comment that was pushed to one side in the rush to condemn. Once upon a time the climate change industry used science to put forward their case. The wheels fell off that wagon when it became obvious that the models on which so much apparently depended did not predict anything that had occurred in the real world. Consequently, the perception-management of the issue moved to the political/emotive sphere, where it is now fronted as described. It appears that the believers cannot or will not discuss science that appears to be off-message, especially if that threatens to challenge their cherished beliefs - as has been so clearly demonstrated in this thread. -- Spike What has been 'clearly demonstrated' is denial of what we clearly face. Good luck pushing your case. Name me a time in human history that was better than the present |
#43
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 15/01/2020 00:52, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 January 2020 09:48:46 UTC, wrote: On Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 9:24:17 AM UTC, Spike wrote: I doubt Greta Thunberg could offer any scientific-based comment or insight more significant than "We need that line to bend down" into the data or analysis contained in Spencer's graph, which was the point of my comment that was pushed to one side in the rush to condemn. Once upon a time the climate change industry used science to put forward their case. The wheels fell off that wagon when it became obvious that the models on which so much apparently depended did not predict anything that had occurred in the real world. Consequently, the perception-management of the issue moved to the political/emotive sphere, where it is now fronted as described. It appears that the believers cannot or will not discuss science that appears to be off-message, especially if that threatens to challenge their cherished beliefs - as has been so clearly demonstrated in this thread. What has been 'clearly demonstrated' is denial of what we clearly face. Good luck pushing your case. Name me a time in human history that was better than the present The Roman Warm Period? The Medieval Warm Period? But in those times atmospheric CO2 was lower than at present, meaning crops, etc, would be poorer. But humankind survived that heating of the planet. I expect the data-collectors of the group could easily say how far south from, say, the environs of Stoke-on-Trent one would have to travel to experience a 1.5degC increase in the climate - I'm guessing somewhere as far as Salisbury or Chichester. -- Spike |
#44
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 10:37:47 UTC, Spike wrote:
On 15/01/2020 00:52, Lawrence Jenkins wrote: On Tuesday, 7 January 2020 09:48:46 UTC, wrote: On Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 9:24:17 AM UTC, Spike wrote: I doubt Greta Thunberg could offer any scientific-based comment or insight more significant than "We need that line to bend down" into the data or analysis contained in Spencer's graph, which was the point of my comment that was pushed to one side in the rush to condemn. Once upon a time the climate change industry used science to put forward their case. The wheels fell off that wagon when it became obvious that the models on which so much apparently depended did not predict anything that had occurred in the real world. Consequently, the perception-management of the issue moved to the political/emotive sphere, where it is now fronted as described. It appears that the believers cannot or will not discuss science that appears to be off-message, especially if that threatens to challenge their cherished beliefs - as has been so clearly demonstrated in this thread. What has been 'clearly demonstrated' is denial of what we clearly face. Good luck pushing your case. Name me a time in human history that was better than the present The Roman Warm Period? The Medieval Warm Period? But in those times atmospheric CO2 was lower than at present, meaning crops, etc, would be poorer. But humankind survived that heating of the planet. I expect the data-collectors of the group could easily say how far south from, say, the environs of Stoke-on-Trent one would have to travel to experience a 1.5degC increase in the climate - I'm guessing somewhere as far as Salisbury or Chichester. -- Spike Co2 levels were high during the dinosaur period, that ended well! Yes, we have never had it so good, well, not everyone, but at what cost, the problem is we are just guessing at how this is going forward, but we can see the direction? Keith (Southend) |
#45
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 10:37:47 AM UTC, Spike wrote:
The Roman Warm Period? The Medieval Warm Period? But in those times atmospheric CO2 was lower than at present, meaning crops, etc, would be poorer. But humankind survived that heating of the planet. I expect the data-collectors of the group could easily say how far south from, say, the environs of Stoke-on-Trent one would have to travel to experience a 1.5degC increase in the climate - I'm guessing somewhere as far as Salisbury or Chichester. -- Spike We have already surpassed the warmth of the MWP. I have a vague recollection of HH Lamb (Climate History and the Modern World, and the previous 'Climate' book) referring to it being 0.7C warmer than the coldest part of the C20. The difference is that we have warmed so quickly this time. Some people kept reading those sources for too long into the current warming period. It is nice to keep textbooks but we have to be careful as the details can become out of date. Spike, you attach a great significance to the MWP and the LIA - neither were truly global phenomena in the sense of the current global warming crisis. PS if you were confident in your assertions, would you not identify yourself? Julian Mayes |
#46
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 12:22:20 UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 10:37:47 AM UTC, Spike wrote: The Roman Warm Period? The Medieval Warm Period? But in those times atmospheric CO2 was lower than at present, meaning crops, etc, would be poorer. But humankind survived that heating of the planet. I expect the data-collectors of the group could easily say how far south from, say, the environs of Stoke-on-Trent one would have to travel to experience a 1.5degC increase in the climate - I'm guessing somewhere as far as Salisbury or Chichester. -- Spike We have already surpassed the warmth of the MWP. I have a vague recollection of HH Lamb (Climate History and the Modern World, and the previous 'Climate' book) referring to it being 0.7C warmer than the coldest part of the C20. The difference is that we have warmed so quickly this time. Some people kept reading those sources for too long into the current warming period. It is nice to keep textbooks but we have to be careful as the details can become out of date. Spike, you attach a great significance to the MWP and the LIA - neither were truly global phenomena in the sense of the current global warming crisis. PS if you were confident in your assertions, would you not identify yourself? Julian Mayes Well done Sir David Attenborough hopefully the message is finally getting through! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51123638 I'm sick of hearing from deniers now. Keith (Southend) |
#47
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Keith Harris wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 January 2020 12:22:20 UTC, wrote: On Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 10:37:47 AM UTC, Spike wrote: The Roman Warm Period? The Medieval Warm Period? But in those times atmospheric CO2 was lower than at present, meaning crops, etc, would be poorer. But humankind survived that heating of the planet. I expect the data-collectors of the group could easily say how far south from, say, the environs of Stoke-on-Trent one would have to travel to experience a 1.5degC increase in the climate - I'm guessing somewhere as far as Salisbury or Chichester. -- Spike We have already surpassed the warmth of the MWP. I have a vague recollection of HH Lamb (Climate History and the Modern World, and the previous 'Climate' book) referring to it being 0.7C warmer than the coldest part of the C20. The difference is that we have warmed so quickly this time. Some people kept reading those sources for too long into the current warming period. It is nice to keep textbooks but we have to be careful as the details can become out of date. Spike, you attach a great significance to the MWP and the LIA - neither were truly global phenomena in the sense of the current global warming crisis. PS if you were confident in your assertions, would you not identify yourself? Julian Mayes Well done Sir David Attenborough hopefully the message is finally getting through! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51123638 I'm sick of hearing from deniers now. Keith (Southend) Well said, indeed. Unfortunately, it seems that the message still isn't getting through. John Gummer (Lord Deben) was on PM this afternoon discussing the subject with Evan Davies. Lord Deben is Chairman of the UK's Independent Committee on Climate Change. He agreed with David Attenborough that action was needed now.That sounded promising but then it transpired that what he meant by 'now was development of a good plan for the UK to present to COP26 in Glasgow in November. The interim time had to be spent on preparing budgets etc. He seemed to be saying that the actual action had to be taken within the next 10 years. It didn't seem to have registered with him that we don't have that sort of time. I was busy with something else at the time so I couldn't concentrate fully on the programme so I might have picked some of it up wrongly. I'll have another listen when it appears on BBC Sounds. -- Norman Lynagh Tideswell, Derbyshire 303m a.s.l. https://peakdistrictweather.org twitter: @TideswellWeathr |
#48
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#49
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 17/01/2020 10:11, Spike wrote:
No-one is growing grapes in Yorkshire... Apparently they a https://tanglewoodwine.co.uk/blogs/n...-north-england Just one more example of misinformation from 'Spike'. |
#50
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 17/01/2020 10:24, JGD wrote:
On 17/01/2020 10:11, Spike wrote: No-one is growing grapes in Yorkshire... Apparently they a https://tanglewoodwine.co.uk/blogs/n...-north-england Just one more example of misinformation from 'Spike'. Amazing. I look forward to trying a bottle or three. All we need to do now is work out how the Romans (and others) survived the climate catastrophe that existed then, without the benefit of it being driven by increased CO2, because if they did, we can, and that makes the CO2 issue irrelevant. Thanks for snipping the other more technical points about proxies and stuff. -- Spike |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
deg F in Summer and deg C in Winter | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
"Break the Grip of the Rip" National Campaign Kicks-Off | Latest News | |||
Rip currents kill more people than tornados, hurricanes, and lightning. | Latest News | |||
NOAA Highlights The Dangers Of Deadly Rip Currents | Latest News | |||
Davis Weather station accessory pricing Rip off | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) |