Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#1469823 - 31/08/2018 15:58 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
petethemoskeet Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 13/08/2003
Posts: 1322
Loc: toowoomba
Probably very little especially the ones that get govt grants.

Top
#1469824 - 31/08/2018 16:09 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: petethemoskeet]
Funkyseefunkydo Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 30/04/2007
Posts: 692
Loc: East Lake Macquarie
Originally Posted By: petethemoskeet
Probably very little especially the ones that get govt grants.

Well I hope you will never need medical science to save your life. Praying will have to do.

Top
#1469828 - 31/08/2018 17:22 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Funkyseefunkydo]
Nature's Fury Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 29/11/2009
Posts: 2204
Loc: Brisbane Western Suburbs
People can argue all they want but it isn't that complicated.

Even on a basic level without going into all the data and science, it's pretty logical. In the last 250 years of civilisation we've been pumping huge and ever-increasing amounts of C02 and methane into the atmosphere through all our activities. So naturally greenhouse gas levels have been measured to increase. We all know how greenhouse gases work and their effects. It's simple cause and effect. And we've seen that humans can have significant detrimental effects on our atmosphere - we nearly destroyed our ozone layer from CFCs and that was in a much shorter period of time. 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.

No doubt there are natural climate cycles and there will continue to be until the end of the solar system. These will affect climate in various and at times significant ways, but there is a clear quantifiable culprit in this case and it isn't some speculated natural cycle.

Unfortunately this topic has been obscured by a whole range of factors: 'manufactured debate' from lobby groups with vested interests, the public's lack of interest or awareness of basic scientific principles, misinformation and emotional commentary on social media, a preference by many people to bury their heads in the sand because of the scale and destructive potential of the problem, and an increasing social and intellectual movement that challenges the very notion that there is such a thing as 'knowledge' and 'fact' only agendas. So many of the counter-arguments have been answered (including some on this very thread already), but people just continue to spin to suit their perspective and then accuse climate scientists of doing the same thing.

While the world argues and does nothing year after year we're 1 degree away from reaching the first of the climate feedback processes that will basically condemn us to run-away warming anywhere up to 6 degrees. We won't actually start doing anything until the effects are so devastating that we simply can't ignore it anymore and by then it's too late. A world at the target of 2 degrees warmer would be very uncomfortable and challenging to civilisation, but if you've read anything about 3-6 it starts to become progressively more apocalyptic and social breakdown would be unavoidable.

Just my 10 cents. I'm not even going to bother with this thread because it's pointless. I'm sure some posters will give a point-by-point rebuttal of each sentence of my post with their own explanations, interpretations and pseudo-science. And then someone else will give a rebuttal of their ideas and round and round we go. You won't convince those who advocate anthropogenic climate change that it's 'all a lie'. And you certainly won't convince skeptics that it's true and we need to take action. So we'll spend the next decades continuing to argue and do nothing until it's too late. However when that time comes I doubt the skeptics will still be so vocal and proud of themselves for obfuscating the issue.

Top
#1469830 - 31/08/2018 17:28 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Delta-T Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 21/01/2011
Posts: 73
Loc: Peachester
Monckton? Please, that fraud has been shredded so many times its embarrassing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpMZ4EpCseM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozn3Ki7pBr4

Top
#1469831 - 31/08/2018 17:32 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Nature's Fury]
Mega Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 03/02/2003
Posts: 7230
Loc: Maryborough, Wide Bay, QLD
Originally Posted By: Nature's Fury
People can argue all they want but it isn't that complicated.

Even on a basic level without going into all the data and science, it's pretty logical. In the last 250 years of civilisation we've been pumping huge and ever-increasing amounts of C02 and methane into the atmosphere through all our activities. So naturally greenhouse gas levels have been measured to increase. We all know how greenhouse gases work and their effects. It's simple cause and effect. And we've seen that humans can have significant detrimental effects on our atmosphere - we nearly destroyed our ozone layer from CFCs and that was in a much shorter period of time. 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.

No doubt there are natural climate cycles and there will continue to be until the end of the solar system. These will affect climate in various and at times significant ways, but there is a clear quantifiable culprit in this case and it isn't some speculated natural cycle.

Unfortunately this topic has been obscured by a whole range of factors: 'manufactured debate' from lobby groups with vested interests, the public's lack of interest or awareness of basic scientific principles, misinformation and emotional commentary on social media, a preference by many people to bury their heads in the sand because of the scale and destructive potential of the problem, and an increasing social and intellectual movement that challenges the very notion that there is such a thing as 'knowledge' and 'fact' only agendas. So many of the counter-arguments have been answered (including some on this very thread already), but people just continue to spin to suit their perspective and then accuse climate scientists of doing the same thing.

While the world argues and does nothing year after year we're 1 degree away from reaching the first of the climate feedback processes that will basically condemn us to run-away warming anywhere up to 6 degrees. We won't actually start doing anything until the effects are so devastating that we simply can't ignore it anymore and by then it's too late. A world at the target of 2 degrees warmer would be very uncomfortable and challenging to civilisation, but if you've read anything about 3-6 it starts to become progressively more apocalyptic and social breakdown would be unavoidable.

Just my 10 cents. I'm not even going to bother with this thread because it's pointless. I'm sure some posters will give a point-by-point rebuttal of each sentence of my post with their own explanations, interpretations and pseudo-science. And then someone else will give a rebuttal of their ideas and round and round we go. You won't convince those who advocate anthropogenic climate change that it's 'all a lie'. And you certainly won't convince skeptics that it's true and we need to take action. So we'll spend the next decades continuing to argue and do nothing until it's too late. However when that time comes I doubt the skeptics will still be so vocal and proud of themselves for obfuscating the issue.


Good post NF. You clarified things very well for me at least.

Top
#1469832 - 31/08/2018 18:00 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Delta-T]
Funkyseefunkydo Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 30/04/2007
Posts: 692
Loc: East Lake Macquarie
Originally Posted By: Delta-T
Monckton? Please, that fraud has been shredded so many times its embarrassing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpMZ4EpCseM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozn3Ki7pBr4

I donít know where u r going with this. But using YouTube as a ďdo your researchĒ is a global problem that beliefs overtake facts.

Top
#1469835 - 31/08/2018 18:25 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: sou]
adon Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 19/08/2004
Posts: 5328
Loc: Not tellin!
Originally Posted By: sou
"Inaccurate and alarming modeling is used to justify an increase in power prices via the subsidizing of renewable's.."
Not exactly. 41% of the increase in electricity prices over the last 10 years has been in network costs, extra retail charges account for 24%, green energy @16%. That's according to Rod Sims of the ACCC.


And a whopping chunk of the infrastructure costs arise from the erratic nature of Renewable energy generation. Itís widely known within the electricity industry how difficult the surges and rapid loss of power are to deal with.

Top
#1469839 - 31/08/2018 18:48 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Flowin Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 15/10/2017
Posts: 536
Loc: Pinjarra Hills, Qld
Shame this "not the climate changes thread" has so much mention of mention of debate on the antonym:(

Re models which is where I think Mike started with this thread, they are an aspect of science, and without them new scientific discoveries would be far less. I have scoped, developed, and used models (not climate simulation, but using climate data) professionally for thirty years. They have their value but always for a purpose, in conjunction with data input and output validation. They are always questionable particularly when lacking in scope, review and data and better when strong in these in quality assurance areas and with ongoing support and change in response to improvement feedback. Imperfections are inevitable and it is observing such model failures, then openly debated that leads to improvements in science.
Without models in science I would think much of modern maths, and our digital world would not exist.
Knowing good science and recognising inferior science is a skill important for those relying on it.

Top
#1469842 - 31/08/2018 19:10 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Nature's Fury]
Petros Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 30/12/2002
Posts: 7384
Loc: Maffra, Central Gippsland, Vi...
Originally Posted By: Nature's Fury
People can argue all they want but it isn't that complicated.

Even on a basic level without going into all the data and science, it's pretty logical. In the last 250 years of civilisation we've been pumping huge and ever-increasing amounts of C02 and methane into the atmosphere through all our activities. So naturally greenhouse gas levels have been measured to increase. We all know how greenhouse gases work and their effects. It's simple cause and effect. And we've seen that humans can have significant detrimental effects on our atmosphere - we nearly destroyed our ozone layer from CFCs and that was in a much shorter period of time. 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.

No doubt there are natural climate cycles and there will continue to be until the end of the solar system. These will affect climate in various and at times significant ways, but there is a clear quantifiable culprit in this case and it isn't some speculated natural cycle.

Unfortunately this topic has been obscured by a whole range of factors: 'manufactured debate' from lobby groups with vested interests, the public's lack of interest or awareness of basic scientific principles, misinformation and emotional commentary on social media, a preference by many people to bury their heads in the sand because of the scale and destructive potential of the problem, and an increasing social and intellectual movement that challenges the very notion that there is such a thing as 'knowledge' and 'fact' only agendas. So many of the counter-arguments have been answered (including some on this very thread already), but people just continue to spin to suit their perspective and then accuse climate scientists of doing the same thing.

While the world argues and does nothing year after year we're 1 degree away from reaching the first of the climate feedback processes that will basically condemn us to run-away warming anywhere up to 6 degrees. We won't actually start doing anything until the effects are so devastating that we simply can't ignore it anymore and by then it's too late. A world at the target of 2 degrees warmer would be very uncomfortable and challenging to civilisation, but if you've read anything about 3-6 it starts to become progressively more apocalyptic and social breakdown would be unavoidable.

Just my 10 cents. I'm not even going to bother with this thread because it's pointless. I'm sure some posters will give a point-by-point rebuttal of each sentence of my post with their own explanations, interpretations and pseudo-science. And then someone else will give a rebuttal of their ideas and round and round we go. You won't convince those who advocate anthropogenic climate change that it's 'all a lie'. And you certainly won't convince skeptics that it's true and we need to take action. So we'll spend the next decades continuing to argue and do nothing until it's too late. However when that time comes I doubt the skeptics will still be so vocal and proud of themselves for obfuscating the issue.



....or when "that time doesn't come" , well we simply take the next soft issue and run with it (and pretend we never said anything!). Remember recently "no snow, dont build dams as they wont fill, huge sea level rises that never transpired in the sea level townships around Aus). Sometimes folk should just look outside the window, remember whats been predicted, then take stock of the cost of all the alarmism.

Top
#1469844 - 31/08/2018 19:14 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Flowin]
Petros Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 30/12/2002
Posts: 7384
Loc: Maffra, Central Gippsland, Vi...
Originally Posted By: Flowin
Shame this "not the climate changes thread" has so much mention of mention of debate on the antonym:(

Re models which is where I think Mike started with this thread, they are an aspect of science, and without them new scientific discoveries would be far less. I have scoped, developed, and used models (not climate simulation, but using climate data) professionally for thirty years. They have their value but always for a purpose, in conjunction with data input and output validation. They are always questionable particularly when lacking in scope, review and data and better when strong in these in quality assurance areas and with ongoing support and change in response to improvement feedback. Imperfections are inevitable and it is observing such model failures, then openly debated that leads to improvements in science.
Without models in science I would think much of modern maths, and our digital world would not exist.
Knowing good science and recognising inferior science is a skill important for those relying on it.



None have an issue with using models, ....it's just the refusal of some to accept when they are wrong (eg last 12 months).

If models worked well, there would be no arguments on WZ forums.

Top
#1469852 - 31/08/2018 20:26 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Petros]
Mike Hauber Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 13/07/2007
Posts: 3308
Loc: Buderim
Originally Posted By: Petros



....or when "that time doesn't come" , well we simply take the next soft issue and run with it (and pretend we never said anything!). Remember recently "no snow, dont build dams as they wont fill, huge sea level rises that never transpired in the sea level townships around Aus).


Predictions like that come from media reports, but are not found in serious climate science projections, and cannot be found in any of the models.

Originally Posted By: Petros
Sometimes folk should just look outside the window, remember whats been predicted, then take stock of the cost of all the alarmism.


Yes they should. Climate scientists have been predicting steady rate of warming for decades. Which is exactly what we see. Those who disagree with the climate scientists are constantly predicting cooling, yet the climate continues to warm. I clearly remember the excited predictions from early 2008 that the climate would continue to cool due to the solar downturn and change in climate cycles. I said the cooling was only temporary. Every year since that prediction was made has been hotter. Told you so.

Top
#1469853 - 31/08/2018 20:38 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
adon Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 19/08/2004
Posts: 5328
Loc: Not tellin!
Yep we are warmer than the figure plucked out of nowhere by someone..... a whole 0.32 of a degree warmer in July. Last week the weekly value was -0.008c

Top
#1469854 - 31/08/2018 20:44 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Mega Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 03/02/2003
Posts: 7230
Loc: Maryborough, Wide Bay, QLD
How do you debunk stuff like this though? https://twitter.com/i/status/954018594848993280

If you run it through from the 1800s to now, there is a clear warming trend. What is the counter-argument here?

Top
#1469862 - 31/08/2018 21:56 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mega]
Kino Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/08/2017
Posts: 2644
Loc: Wollongong, NSW, Aus
Originally Posted By: Mega
How do you debunk stuff like this though? https://twitter.com/i/status/954018594848993280

If you run it through from the 1800s to now, there is a clear warming trend. What is the counter-argument here?


Given the historic records are daily homogenised and discarded, how do we even know what the real base is? I mean, Blair Trewin regularly on this forum discounts and disregards historical temp records. If they're so unreliable, how can we then base a forecast on them?

Top
#1469864 - 31/08/2018 22:19 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
adon Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 19/08/2004
Posts: 5328
Loc: Not tellin!
The 1800s was during the Glasberg solar Minimum. It was not as severe as the Dalton Minimum and much less severe than the Maunder. It makes perfect sence that the temps would have been rising since then. We are just getting into the Modern Minimum AKA the Eddy Minimum. We are just starting to se this having an effect. The modern Minimum is predicted to be at least as severe as the Dalton and possibly the Maunder. Mostly Grand solar Minimum last for at least 30 year but last anything up to 150+years. The recent drought in Europe exposed some of the low water markets on rocks in the bottom of some rivers. Large marks were made on these rocks during the the Maunder Minimum. Itís beginning again

Top
#1469865 - 31/08/2018 22:30 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Funkyseefunkydo Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 30/04/2007
Posts: 692
Loc: East Lake Macquarie
Daily milked? I guess physics and math are not worth studying. Beliefs are more important.


Edited by Funkyseefunkydo (31/08/2018 22:35)

Top
#1469866 - 31/08/2018 23:03 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Mega Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 03/02/2003
Posts: 7230
Loc: Maryborough, Wide Bay, QLD
Originally Posted By: Kino
Originally Posted By: Mega
How do you debunk stuff like this though? https://twitter.com/i/status/954018594848993280

If you run it through from the 1800s to now, there is a clear warming trend. What is the counter-argument here?


Given the historic records are daily homogenised and discarded, how do we even know what the real base is? I mean, Blair Trewin regularly on this forum discounts and disregards historical temp records. If they're so unreliable, how can we then base a forecast on them?


Originally Posted By: adon
The 1800s was during the Glasberg solar Minimum. It was not as severe as the Dalton Minimum and much less severe than the Maunder. It makes perfect sence that the temps would have been rising since then. We are just getting into the Modern Minimum AKA the Eddy Minimum. We are just starting to se this having an effect. The modern Minimum is predicted to be at least as severe as the Dalton and possibly the Maunder. Mostly Grand solar Minimum last for at least 30 year but last anything up to 150+years. The recent drought in Europe exposed some of the low water markets on rocks in the bottom of some rivers. Large marks were made on these rocks during the the Maunder Minimum. Itís beginning again


Points taken.

What about the ice caps melting and all that?

Top
#1469868 - 31/08/2018 23:36 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
Morham Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 23/01/2017
Posts: 109
Loc: Penrith, NSW
Tis a fascinating discussion. Cheers to the mods for keeping the thread open. Appreciate it.

And what is the cost of the alarmism? Wind farms? Solar power? Tesla batteries?

Assuming all the thousands of scientists around the world are in on a massive data manipulating conspiracy and the climate is not warming....the worst case is we spend lots of money on wind farms, solar farms and cleaner energy. Which is actually good for humans.

Assuming they are right, and earth is warming too much, human civilisation takes a hit. Some areas become uninhabitable, some areas get flooded, probably war over resources. There would be mass migrations to cooler climates in the far south or north.

Also realise we live in the age of russian style bot opinion spam. When you read that nonsense like it will never snow again in some region, or by 2022 all glaciers will have melted..groups easily hire these troll farms to inject as much extremism on both sides of the argument so as to confuse and divide opinion.

Finally, are there any good models showing how much earth will cool with the impending solar minimum? Because Penrith was bloody hot this year in summer! smile

Top
#1469869 - 31/08/2018 23:56 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
adon Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 19/08/2004
Posts: 5328
Loc: Not tellin!
Antarctica is back to normal-above normal this year and the Arctic Minimum ice extent has been getting larger for the last 4or 5 years. This year I particular has a lot of quite thick ice left so I would be treating that statement with a rather large pinch of salt. Greenland is gaining ice already this year according to the Danish meteorological society

As a side note the leader of this fascinating modern day religion has foretold of the arctic being ice free by 2012 then it was 2014/6/8 and now somewhoin the 2020s.


Edited by adon (01/09/2018 00:00)

Top
#1469872 - 01/09/2018 03:45 Re: Not the climate change thread [Re: Mike Hauber]
adon Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 19/08/2004
Posts: 5328
Loc: Not tellin!
Originally Posted By: Mike Hauber
[quote=Petros]


....or when "that time doesn't come" , well we simply take the next soft issue and run with it (and pretend we never said anything!). Remember recently "no snow, dont build dams as they wont fill, huge sea level rises that never transpired in the sea level townships around Aus).


Predictions like that come from media reports, but are not found in serious climate science projections, and cannot be found in any of the models.

A quote from a researcher

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

Top
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >


Who's Online
1 registered (1 invisible), 333 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
aurbina1, Justin Case
Forum Stats
29681 Members
32 Forums
23981 Topics
1501187 Posts

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