Page 85 of 92 < 1 2 ... 83 84 85 86 87 ... 91 92 >
Topic Options
#1467048 - 07/07/2018 15:19 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
BIG T Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 24/01/2012
Posts: 1094
Loc: Albany Creek , QLD
Bloody warm day today for July, ridiculous. Feels like late September.

Top
#1467050 - 07/07/2018 16:55 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
The theme I get out of this also is that if you do not believe like I do then you are a "denier" or a "skeptic." The facts speak for themselves. The theory of made global warming is falling apart. This will become more and more evident as the years go on. Just because one "feels" like 7 billion have to be doing something to the climate is meaningless. That is not based on fact, but emotion.
Yes, we are pumping all sorts of disgusting pollutants into the atmosphere. But CO2 is NOT one of those. That is all I am saying. Let us look at the "facts" in the articles instead of where they come from all of the time. Many brilliant, honest scientists are doing study into solar activity and climate. We are learning new things every day.
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467051 - 07/07/2018 17:04 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
The theme I get out of this also is that if you do not believe like I do then you are a "denier" or a "skeptic." The facts speak for themselves. The theory of made global warming is falling apart. This will become more and more evident as the years go on. Just because one "feels" like 7 billion have to be doing something to the climate is meaningless. That is not based on fact, but emotion.
Yes, we are pumping all sorts of disgusting pollutants into the atmosphere. But CO2 is NOT one of those. That is all I am saying. Let us look at the "facts" in the articles instead of where they come from all of the time. Many brilliant, honest scientists are doing study into solar activity and climate. We are learning new things every day.

This is why I try and avoid getting into these kinds of arguments. No matter how many times I try to address the same tired old recirculated misconceptions, hardly any of them get addressed and instead, more misconceptions are raised. I mean how many times does this have to happen?
"Facts"? They're facts because you believe them? The "theory" of manmade global warming is "falling apart" because you say it's falling apart? CO2 is one of them. Not only is there an overwhelming amount of data that shows it, the anthropogenic component can be determined by measuring carbon isotope ratios.

Top
#1467054 - 07/07/2018 17:33 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
CO2 is certainly going up, but the climate is not warming to match the rise in CO2. Plus, like mentioned, we are only putting very small amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere compared to natural causes. I think the main confusion here is that warming causes rise in CO2, not the other way around. although there is a big lag in that process. Greenland ice core samples and Antarctic ice core samples prove this. It was certainly warmer during the Medieval period that it is today. The Vikings also landed in Greenland when there was much less ice present there. I will let everyone look at the arguements and articles and make their own decision. Otherwise Ken, neither of us will get any sleep. Lastly, one last point, a warming planet would be much better than a cooling planet in terms of agricultural reasons and survival of the human race. Right?
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467056 - 07/07/2018 17:50 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Mad Elf #1.5 Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 3364
Loc: Mt Hallen QLD
Very warm day today, started drizzly, foggy & then the westerlies came to clean up the mess.
Just a tiny side note if I may; CO2 is an essential natural occuring gas, without it we wouldnt be here!

Top
#1467057 - 07/07/2018 17:51 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
CO2 is certainly going up, but the climate is not warming to match the rise in CO2. Plus, like mentioned, we are only putting very small amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere compared to natural causes. I think the main confusion here is that warming causes rise in CO2, not the other way around. although there is a big lag in that process. Greenland ice core samples and Antarctic ice core samples prove this. It was certainly warmer during the Medieval period that it is today. The Vikings also landed in Greenland when there was much less ice present there. I will let everyone look at the arguements and articles and make their own decision. Otherwise Ken, neither of us will get any sleep. Lastly, one last point, a warming planet would be much better than a cooling planet in terms of agricultural reasons and survival of the human race. Right?

All of this has also been addressed countless times in the past so instead of me spending time rehashing the same things, here's some links to further info. Even though I've given one website for the first four links, it's one of many whose info is aggregated from hundreds of climate scientists around the world and their research and they provide references to the sources they got their info from which anyone can follow to confirm for themselves (in particular, check out the most common myths next to the big thermometer on the left hand side of the page):

https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature-basic.htm

https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-increase-is-natural-not-human-caused.htm

https://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-positives-negatives.htm

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://physicsworld.com/a/carbon-dioxides-contribution-to-greenhouse-effect-monitored-in-real-time/

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page3.php








P.S. yes Mad Elf, but more isn't always better and especially not in this case.


Edited by Ken Kato (07/07/2018 17:57)

Top
#1467059 - 07/07/2018 18:11 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
The problem is Ken that some of these same climate scientists that have contributed to the info above have also been caught red handed falsifying data to fit an agenda. NOAA and NASA come to mind. Why would climate scientists need to act in such a manner if the truth is on their side?
Anyway, I have provided links and so have you. Let us leave it here. Cheers.
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467060 - 07/07/2018 18:15 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
I do agree, living here, I do not feel any cooling. It is hard to get excited about my arguements when we always seem to be for the most part warm and dry, lol.
But this is a global thing, and the next few years should produce the icy goods for us! wink
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467062 - 07/07/2018 18:22 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Nature's Fury Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 29/11/2009
Posts: 2096
Loc: Brisbane Western Suburbs
It's incredible that a scientific theory which is so strongly supported by evidence and has practically a unanimous consensus in the scientific community is so debated. In that case we should probably challenge every other scientific theory - atoms aren't real, the earth is flat, smoking is good for us, CFCs don't destroy the ozone layer. I guess it's our bad luck that so many vested interests feel threatened by this issue and that social media perpetuates inane, irrational and non-expert opinions. I hope at the end of the century when the world is in big trouble that all the naysayers are proud of themselves for obfuscating the issue.

Top
#1467066 - 07/07/2018 18:39 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Nature's Fury]
Mega Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 03/02/2003
Posts: 7018
Loc: Maryborough, Wide Bay, QLD
Originally Posted By: Nature's Fury
It's incredible that a scientific theory which is so strongly supported by evidence and has practically a unanimous consensus in the scientific community is so debated. In that case we should probably challenge every other scientific theory - atoms aren't real, the earth is flat, smoking is good for us, CFCs don't destroy the ozone layer. I guess it's our bad luck that so many vested interests feel threatened by this issue and that social media perpetuates inane, irrational and non-expert opinions. I hope at the end of the century when the world is in big trouble that all the naysayers are proud of themselves for obfuscating the issue.


cheers

Top
#1467067 - 07/07/2018 18:50 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
The problem is Ken that some of these same climate scientists that have contributed to the info above have also been caught red handed falsifying data to fit an agenda. NOAA and NASA come to mind. Why would climate scientists need to act in such a manner if the truth is on their side?
Anyway, I have provided links and so have you. Let us leave it here. Cheers.

No they didn't.
To name one of many examples: https://www.skepticalscience.com/Climategate-CRU-emails-hacked.htm
https://www.skepticalscience.com/CRU-tampered-temperature-data.htm

To name another example, the one involving the Bureau and so-called manipulation of data, not even a technical advisory forum instigated by the federal government itself (at the time when it was led by Tony Abbott and it was no secret that they were very much anti global warming and critical of the Bureau) to review the Bureau's data methods found any wrongdoing on the part of the Bureau and followed best practices despite all the accusations to the contrary.

Whenever someone throws around claims that climate scientists have something to gain from publishing info that happens to back up the evidence of manmade climate change, I always like to ask "what exactly do climate scientists have to gain?" I'm often met by silence, or sometimes "money". Well it's not money because if that actually happened in real life, all climate scientists would be riding around in chauffeur-driven limos and living in multimillion dollar mansions. I'm yet to meet a rich climate scientist.

The other obvious flaw in the whole ulterior motive argument that never gets mentioned is the fact that the Bureau's climate scientists continued work and research despite the fact that most in the government were heavy duty climate change skeptics. So if climate scientists really did have something to gain for publishing papers on climate change, don't you think they would've suddenly done a backflip and started writing climate change skeptic papers to get more money? It's not just the Bureau which researches and publishes data on climate change either. Almost all national weather agencies around the world whether in first or third world countries, thousands and thousands of researchers in both universities and private institutions, etc research and publish material on climate change. Many of these people devote their whole lives to it because it's their passion, not to get rich from it.

I actually find it pretty disappointing that people who have little real life experience or knowledge about some complex technical field can throw around all sorts of accusations willy nilly at people who are simply doing what they love doing for a living and many of who are almost savant-like abilities in the fields they specialise in. This seems especially the case in this day and age of social media where everyone suddenly seems to be an expert in dam operations, hydrology, climatology, etc. I'm not for one minute trying to put down people who have no experience in these fields... I mean after all, no-one is an expert in everything and everyone is a lay person when it comes to all sorts of fields... however it's one thing to be inquisitive and question things... but it's another to throw around accusations at people who work in a field they have little knowledge in. For example, I hardly know anything about sharks so I'm not in any position to criticise those who are responsible for shark control measures along beaches or accuse them of wrongdoing. A lot of things are not what they seem to the average Joe, especially when it comes to complex or technical fields.

By the way, I've started reading the links you posted but did you read any of mine? If so, they address almost everything you've raised so far.

P.S. agreed Nature's Fury.

Top
#1467068 - 07/07/2018 19:25 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
NF, unanimous consensus? You have to be kidding me?! Maybe in the 90's, surly not now. Your post makes no sense.
And yes Ken, there has been corruption, you do not have to be a climate scientist to figure that one out. No doubt about it.
www.realclimatescience.com has a few examples.
There are also so many brilliant scientists out there that no longer believe in man made global warming. No, the science is not settled.
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467069 - 07/07/2018 19:37 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
NF, unanimous consensus? You have to be kidding me?! Maybe in the 90's, surly not now. Your post makes no sense.
And yes Ken, there has been corruption, you do not have to be a climate scientist to figure that one out. No doubt about it.
www.realclimatescience.com has a few examples.
There are also so many brilliant scientists out there that no longer believe in man made global warming. No, the science is not settled.


The consensus is above 95% among practising climate scientists and is consistent with multiple surveys (this was also contained in one of the links I posted in my earlier post: https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)
This has been very well known for some time now.

For example,
" Those results are consistent with the 97% consensus reported by Cook et al (Environ. Res. Lett. 8 024024) based on 11944 abstracts of research papers, of which 4014 took a position on the cause of recent global warming. A survey of authors of those papers (N = 2412 papers) also supported a 97% consensus. Tol (2016 Environ. Res. Lett. 11 048001) comes to a different conclusion using results from surveys of non-experts such as economic geologists and a self-selected group of those who reject the consensus. We demonstrate that this outcome is not unexpected because the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science. We examine the available studies and conclude that the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies. "

You say there has been corruption and that you do not have to be a climate scientist to figure that one out. I'm interested in knowing the proof of this corruption, why you don't have to be a climate scientist to figure that one out, and am still awaiting your responses to my previous points about how climate scientists don't get rich from publishing material that happens to support one side of the fence and what they actually gain from this?

Top
#1467070 - 07/07/2018 19:38 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Mad Elf #1.5 Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 3364
Loc: Mt Hallen QLD
Can we get on with it please?
When is it likely to rain again?

Top
#1467071 - 07/07/2018 19:44 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Ken Kato]
Blowin' Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 23/08/2014
Posts: 919
Loc: Diamond Valley, Sunshine Coast
Iíd like to say... ó- paid troll alertó
Isnít this raving banned due to the current emotional discourse?
A bot or otherwise...

Originally Posted By: Ken Kato
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
The theme I get out of this also is that if you do not believe like I do then you are a "denier" or a "skeptic." The facts speak for themselves. The theory of made global warming is falling apart. This will become more and more evident as the years go on. Just because one "feels" like 7 billion have to be doing something to the climate is meaningless. That is not based on fact, but emotion.
Yes, we are pumping all sorts of disgusting pollutants into the atmosphere. But CO2 is NOT one of those. That is all I am saying. Let us look at the "facts" in the articles instead of where they come from all of the time. Many brilliant, honest scientists are doing study into solar activity and climate. We are learning new things every day.

This is why I try and avoid getting into these kinds of arguments. No matter how many times I try to address the same tired old recirculated misconceptions, hardly any of them get addressed and instead, more misconceptions are raised. I mean how many times does this have to happen?
"Facts"? They're facts because you believe them? The "theory" of manmade global warming is "falling apart" because you say it's falling apart? CO2 is one of them. Not only is there an overwhelming amount of data that shows it, the anthropogenic component can be determined by measuring carbon isotope ratios.


Edited by Blowin' (07/07/2018 19:51)
Edit Reason: Woah

Top
#1467072 - 07/07/2018 19:50 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Blowin' Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 23/08/2014
Posts: 919
Loc: Diamond Valley, Sunshine Coast
Change has hit here. After and shorts and t shirt July day at the beach...
Yes...quite warm
Please tell me next Saturday is going to be dry.

Definitely pleased I went up western Fraser. D say a week back where 50mm was possible ended up with the southern half of the island getting wet. Was quite perfect really. Nice to seen the fog over the land from out wide too .

Quite windy now


Edited by Blowin' (07/07/2018 19:53)

Top
#1467073 - 07/07/2018 20:05 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
It was 53% consensus for Ken. Others were unsure, thought maybe, thought maybe not, etc. They simply added all of the ones that were not totally against it and came up with the 97%.
Regarding what they have to gain? The question should be what they might lose, like government grants and even possibly their jobs.
The bigger picture Ken might go well beyond climate science and the climatologists themselves. Nothing more needs to be said.
Yes Mad, I am getting tired of discussing this too.
Sorry everyone for the last few hours of, well, absolutely nothing gained.
Colder weather for the next few days Mad then warmer again, especially at night with SE winds returning. I do not see any major changes other than that.
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467074 - 07/07/2018 20:13 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Warwick Eye2Sky Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 31/08/2010
Posts: 976
Loc: Warwick, QLD
Check out the little hurricane out in the Atlantic....

www.myfoxhurricane.com

Quite early in the season in that area of the Atlantic. Plus, waters are not overly warm and there has been quite a bit of African dust in the area. Interesting.
_________________________
Michael - your eyes to the west.

Top
#1467076 - 07/07/2018 20:29 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Warwick Eye2Sky]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
Originally Posted By: Warwick Eye2Sky
It was 53% consensus for Ken. Others were unsure, thought maybe, thought maybe not, etc. They simply added all of the ones that were not totally against it and came up with the 97%.

Where did you get that from? They didn't add up all the ones that weren't totally against it at all. The 97% is simply the percentage of those who agree that the main cause now is anthropogenic. This is the same with the other surveys that came up with almost identical results. The methodology is clearly spelled out in the surveys.

Quote:
Regarding what they have to gain? The question should be what they might lose, like government grants and even possibly their jobs.
The bigger picture Ken might go well beyond climate science and the climatologists themselves. Nothing more needs to be said.

But this has already been addressed in my previous posts i.e. you don't get paid to sit on a particular side of the climate science fence. If that was actually the case, all climate scientists would be riding around in limos and living in expensive mansions. Furthermore (and as I also said in my post) if this really was the case, why did climate scientists keep publishing their work even under the Abbott government which was well known for being anti manmade climate change. If you were a climate scientist for a federal agency like the Bureau and you got money for research findings that agree with the scientific consensus, do you really think you'd still keep coming out with the same research findings under a government that doesn't support your research?
This is like someone accusing doctors and medical researchers for deliberately inventing diseases so they can get extra money to come up with new treatments and get rich off it.

All this goes back to what I was saying earlier. It's just so remarkably predictable that these debates always end up with the same inevitable fate i.e. person A raises common misconceptions that cast doubt on climate science... person B addresses/debunks those misconceptions with info that is readily accessible to anyone... person A doesn't address any of the debunking (if there really was credible doubt about the climate science, those debunkings could be easily addressed) but instead, we move onto different misconceptions... and so on until the whole thing reduces to "we'll have to agree to disagree" or "they're all corrupt".
It might bring a peaceful end to such debates but the only problem is, the same cycle will eventually happen again and science and those who practise it will be attacked again. It'd be nice to think that instead of constantly accusing climate scientists as corrupt, etc, people would actually be inquisitive and find out more about why the climate is doing what it's doing.

Top
#1467077 - 07/07/2018 20:54 Re: SEQLD / NENSW Day to Day Weather - 2018 [Re: Seabreeze]
Ken Kato Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/03/2012
Posts: 5215
If we applied the same standards that these skeptics hold up to climate scientists up to the skeptics, the latter's world would be the thing that's falling apart, not the other way around.

Constantly attacking climate science using catch phrases and sound bites such as "alarmist", "corrupt", etc that appeal to the masses with statements that contain the most fundamental flaws or lack context, a number of who get paid by big oil companies, etc... but in the same breath, conveniently ignoring any debunking of their statements (or resorting to "I'm no expert but it's obvious to anyone"). Extreme double standards if you ask me.

There was a time when I could just stay silent on the issue but when I stop to think about it, people who are interested in climate science should have the right to not have to sit there and shut up every time someone throws around baseless accusations that attack the field they're interested in or have experience in. I think it's entirely possible to have a discussion about it where people actually discuss all sorts of interesting things about what drives our climate here and overseas without resorting to the attacking of the science behind it.

Top
Page 85 of 92 < 1 2 ... 83 84 85 86 87 ... 91 92 >


Who's Online
4 registered (deanh, Keethy, davida, 1 invisible), 254 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
Aza1987, Dominic, NoRelationToNed, potato, Radar05
Forum Stats
29612 Members
32 Forums
23933 Topics
1494522 Posts

Max Online: 2925 @ 02/02/2011 22:23
Satellite Image