Page 80 of 323 < 1 2 ... 78 79 80 81 82 ... 322 323 >
Topic Options
#956522 - 05/02/2011 13:02 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Loopy Radar]
Spatch Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 28/01/2011
Posts: 360
Originally Posted By: Loopy Radar
Originally Posted By: Spatch
Originally Posted By: Loopy Radar
quote from Spatches link
"That brings up the basic science of global warming. I’m not going to spend a lot of
time on this because you know it well."
The Gore smoking gun is the separation of the carbon and temperature graphs, to hide the fact that temp. rises before carbon. You can't miss a smoking gun when it's pointed at you.
Gores success relies entirely on majority ignorance, and now the lies have reached the gutter with every climate event blamed on AGW.


Sorry but there is no smoking gun.

This point of CO2 lagging temps has been done to death.

Link

When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise.

From the comments.

That CO2 lags and amplifies temperature was actually predicted in 1990 in a paper The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming

"Changes in the CO2 and CH4 content have played a significant part in the glacial-interglacial climate changes by amplifying, together with the growth and decay of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets, the relatively weak orbital forcing"

The paper also notes that orbital changes are one initial cause for ice ages. This was published over a decade before ice core records were accurate enough to confirm a CO2 lag.


So why did Gore feel the need to separate the graphs? Did he presume there would be at least a few of us who would turn an eyebrow, at a graph that obviously suggests completely the opposite of what he's trying to preach.

(quote) *
Deglaciation is not initiated by CO2 but by orbital cycles
*
CO2 amplifies the warming which cannot be explained by orbital cycles alone
*
CO2 spreads warming throughout the planet

Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument.
Gores assertion is rediculous. Just as stupid as Browns assertion that coal mining has caused the floods. But I'm not surprised. We keep going on like the world never changes. make absurd assertions like 'a 1 in 100 year event' when records go back 150 years. Maybe we should have listened to the 'backward savages' who said when settlers began settling the Wilsons River experienced their first 'record' flood. "Oohh. You should not live there bro. It go much higher bro. 30ft higher bro. You finish in sea bro."

Even if we are influencing global warming, the degree cannot be shown simply because there have been events of similar magnitude in relatively recent times. There is absolutely no evidence that these floods and cyclones are anything but natural.



Quote:
Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument.


Wrong!

You said:

Quote:
The Gore smoking gun is the separation of the carbon and temperature graphs, to hide the fact that temp. rises before carbon. You can't miss a smoking gun when it's pointed at you.


I showed you that there is no smoking gun.

The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)

“Doesn’t the relationship between CO2 and temperature in the ice core record show that temperature drives CO2, not the other way round?”

On the face of it, it sounds like a reasonable question. It is no surprise that it comes up because it is one of the most popular claims made by the global warming sceptics. It got a particularly high profile airing a couple of weeks ago, when congressman Joe Barton brought it up to try to discredit Al Gore’s congressional testimony. Barton said:

In your movie, you display a timeline of temperature and compared to CO2 levels over a 600,000-year period as reconstructed from ice core samples. You indicate that this is conclusive proof of the link of increased CO2 emissions and global warming. A closer examination of these facts reveals something entirely different. I have an article from Science magazine which I will put into the record at the appropriate time that explains that historically, a rise in CO2 concentrations did not precede a rise in temperatures, but actually lagged temperature by 200 to 1,000 years. CO2 levels went up after the temperature rose. The temperature appears to drive CO2, not vice versa. On this point, Mr. Vice President, you’re not just off a little. You’re totally wrong.

Of course, those who’ve been paying attention will recognize that Gore is not wrong at all. This subject has been very well addressed in numerous places.

What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?

Loopy Radar - If, after reading all the above, you still insist that there is a smoking gun then I'm sorry but the problem is with your inability to take on-board new information.

Top
#956544 - 05/02/2011 13:26 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Spatch]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
CO2 lags Temperature changes
Submitted by admin on Sun, 11/01/2009 - 14:26
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration Across the Mid-Pleistocene Transition
(Science, Volume 324, Number 5934, pp. 1551-1554, June 2009)
- Bärbel Hönisch, N. Gary Hemming, David Archer, Mark Siddall, Jerry F. McManus

"The lack of a gradual decrease in interglacial PCO2 does not support the suggestion that a long-term drawdown of atmospheric CO2 was the main cause of the climate transition."

Atmospheric CO2 Concentration from 60 to 20 kyr BP from the Taylor Dome ice core, Antarctica (PDF)
(Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 27, Issue 5, March 2000)
- Andreas Inderm¨uhle, Eric Monnin, Bernhard Stauer, Thomas F. Stocker

"The lag was calculated for which the correlation coefficient of the CO2 record and the corresponding temperatures values reached a maximum. The simulation yields a lag of (1200 ± 700) yr."
Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations over the Last Glacial Termination
(Science, Volume 291. Number 5501, January 2001)
- Eric Monnin, Andreas Indermühle, André Dällenbach, Jacqueline Flückiger, Bernhard Stauffer, Thomas F. Stocker, Dominique Raynaud, Jean-Marc Barnola

"The start of the CO2 increase thus lagged the start of the [temperature] increase by 800 ± 600 years."
Ice core records of atmospheric CO2 around the last three glacial terminations
(Science, Volume 283, Number 5408, pp. 1712-1714, March 1999)
- Hubertus Fischer, Martin Wahlen, Jesse Smith, Derek Mastroianni, Bruce Deck

"High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 ± 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations."
Southern Hemisphere and Deep-Sea Warming Led Deglacial Atmospheric CO2 Rise and Tropical Warming
(Science, Volume 318, Issue 5849, September 2007)
- Lowell Stott, Axel Timmermann, Robert Thunell

"Deep sea temperatures warmed by ~2C between 19 and 17 ka B.P. (thousand years before present), leading the rise in atmospheric CO2 and tropical surface ocean warming by ~1000 years."
The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature and global ice volume over the past 420 ka (PDF)
(Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp. 583-589, February 2001)
- Manfred Mudelsee

"Over the full 420 ka of the Vostok record, CO2 variations lag behind atmospheric temperature changes in the Southern Hemisphere by 1.3±1.0 ka"
Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III
(Science, Volume 299, Number 5613, March 2003)
- Nicolas Caillon, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, Jean Jouzel, Jean-Marc Barnola, Jiancheng Kang, Volodya Y. Lipenkov

"The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation."
http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/co2-lags-temperature-changes

Top
#956546 - 05/02/2011 13:27 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html
CONCLUSION



On this assessment, the evidence points to a current natural climate change which happens sequentially in two main climate periods, icehouse and warmhouse.



It also reveals the succession of four natural climate phases known as transgression, highstand, regression and lowstand. The transgression phase consists of a rising Sea Level, flooding continental areas. Highstand is a phase where the marine level remains relatively stable but oscillating into the transgression phase. The regression phase consists of a gradual diminution of the marine level, leaving a greater area of the continents uncovered. The phase of Lowstand consists of a permanence of low marine level. Currently, the Earth is passing through a lowstand phase, which will revert to Transgression phase. The succession of these phases show the Earth is cooling.



At the moment, the area of continental flood is almost 7%; according to climatic succession, we expect the area of continental flood to increase to almost 10%, but never so massive that it will put human populations in danger, as the IPCC has taken to suggesting almost every day. Allow me to clarify that most of the claims regarding catastrophic climate change filling the newspapers are overblown and based on data that is being arbitrarily exaggerated to blame humanity for climatic changes which are absolutely natural.

Top
#956549 - 05/02/2011 13:31 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
Solar Cycles Cause Global Warming & Cooling
not Humans...referenced papers
http://www.lunarplanner.com/SolarCycles-climate.html

Top
#956653 - 05/02/2011 15:51 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
Simmosturf Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 17/03/2008
Posts: 1620
Loc: Wangaratta

Top
#956665 - 05/02/2011 15:59 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
Spatch Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 28/01/2011
Posts: 360
Originally Posted By: Bucketing Down(BD)
Solar Cycles Cause Global Warming & Cooling
not Humans...referenced papers
http://www.lunarplanner.com/SolarCycles-climate.html



*Yawn*

In the last 35 years of global warming, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate have been going in opposite directions. In the past century, the Sun can explain some of the increase in global temperatures, but a relatively small amount.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming-advanced.htm

Top
#956672 - 05/02/2011 16:05 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: ROM]
Seira Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 27/08/2003
Posts: 7607
Loc: Adelaide Hills
My impression of recent trends in this and simlar threads continues to be reinforced from my previous post!


Edited by -Cosmic- (naz) (05/02/2011 16:06)
_________________________
Knowledge is what to say, wisdom is knowing whether to say it. Understanding connects the two.

Top
#956676 - 05/02/2011 16:10 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
Spatch Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 28/01/2011
Posts: 360
Originally Posted By: Bucketing Down(BD)
http://www.biocab.org/carbon_dioxide_geological_timescale.html
CONCLUSION



On this assessment, the evidence points to a current natural climate change which happens sequentially in two main climate periods, icehouse and warmhouse.



It also reveals the succession of four natural climate phases known as transgression, highstand, regression and lowstand. The transgression phase consists of a rising Sea Level, flooding continental areas. Highstand is a phase where the marine level remains relatively stable but oscillating into the transgression phase. The regression phase consists of a gradual diminution of the marine level, leaving a greater area of the continents uncovered. The phase of Lowstand consists of a permanence of low marine level. Currently, the Earth is passing through a lowstand phase, which will revert to Transgression phase. The succession of these phases show the Earth is cooling.



At the moment, the area of continental flood is almost 7%; according to climatic succession, we expect the area of continental flood to increase to almost 10%, but never so massive that it will put human populations in danger, as the IPCC has taken to suggesting almost every day. Allow me to clarify that most of the claims regarding catastrophic climate change filling the newspapers are overblown and based on data that is being arbitrarily exaggerated to blame humanity for climatic changes which are absolutely natural.





From the article:

Quote:
For example, the present increase of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide was caused by an extraordinary increase in solar activity in 1998 which warmed up the El Niño South Atlantic Oceanic Oscillation.

These increases in concentration of atmospheric CO2 offer optimal conditions for the development and evolution of living beings on Earth. Human beings should adapt to these natural changes by means of science and technology.



Aaahahahaaa What a hoot! This guy's a comedian!

Thanks for the laugh BD!

Top
#956766 - 05/02/2011 17:28 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Spatch]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
You may laugh on the other side of your face eventually
Solar runs almost the whole show, it and oceans...which are basiclly run by solar also.
Solar is the only external energy available for the earths weather systems.
There are huige variations of different solar energies which have different effects
on the atnosphere and weather...not just TSI which is a purely basic measure of the lot,
which shows much less change.
I use solar effects for forecasting all the time and there are hundreds of papers out there showing the interactions of solar and ionosphere and atmosphere and oceans.
Go and study up for a few months and years abd come back with something
decent instead of short uncalled for "ridicule comments" which you seem to like to do...
People are more balanced and smarter than that,
they can see the truth and common sense of the whole Co2 AGW matter, they and I will not
be swayed or influenced by such tatics,,,you will only lose more support
by continuing.


Edited by Bucketing Down(BD) (05/02/2011 17:32)

Top
#956795 - 05/02/2011 18:28 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
I will admit that I have gone from being annoyed at Splatch's antics to actually starting to have quite a good laugh at the sheer idiocy of most of what he assumes is his caustic comments and at the incredible amount of effort he is putting in to digging up some support for his version of a cult history.
[ or was that Spatch? Ah well, I was roundly accused of deliberately misnaming last time so who gives a hoot now! ]

Thanks splatch for the laughs. We needed a good few laughs after all the past arguing.

Top
#956797 - 05/02/2011 18:33 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Spatch]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Originally Posted By: Spatch
Originally Posted By: Loopy Radar
Originally Posted By: Spatch
Originally Posted By: Loopy Radar
quote from Spatches link
"That brings up the basic science of global warming. I’m not going to spend a lot of
time on this because you know it well."
The Gore smoking gun is the separation of the carbon and temperature graphs, to hide the fact that temp. rises before carbon. You can't miss a smoking gun when it's pointed at you.
Gores success relies entirely on majority ignorance, and now the lies have reached the gutter with every climate event blamed on AGW.


My ability to take on new information is why I can no longer accept AGW. Because of my concern for the environment I used to somewhat skeptically take on board AGW. It seem to make some sense. However my initial skepticism was drawn from that involvement. I saw 1st hand how Greenies are herded into taking on nonsense like "Eden will be a desert in 20 years' because of the logging. Well that was 20 years ago.


Sorry but there is no smoking gun.

This point of CO2 lagging temps has been done to death.

Link

When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming AND rising temperature causes CO2 rise.

From the comments.

That CO2 lags and amplifies temperature was actually predicted in 1990 in a paper The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming

"Changes in the CO2 and CH4 content have played a significant part in the glacial-interglacial climate changes by amplifying, together with the growth and decay of the Northern Hemisphere ice sheets, the relatively weak orbital forcing"

The paper also notes that orbital changes are one initial cause for ice ages. This was published over a decade before ice core records were accurate enough to confirm a CO2 lag.


So why did Gore feel the need to separate the graphs? Did he presume there would be at least a few of us who would turn an eyebrow, at a graph that obviously suggests completely the opposite of what he's trying to preach.

(quote) *
Deglaciation is not initiated by CO2 but by orbital cycles
*
CO2 amplifies the warming which cannot be explained by orbital cycles alone
*
CO2 spreads warming throughout the planet

Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument.
Gores assertion is rediculous. Just as stupid as Browns assertion that coal mining has caused the floods. But I'm not surprised. We keep going on like the world never changes. make absurd assertions like 'a 1 in 100 year event' when records go back 150 years. Maybe we should have listened to the 'backward savages' who said when settlers began settling the Wilsons River experienced their first 'record' flood. "Oohh. You should not live there bro. It go much higher bro. 30ft higher bro. You finish in sea bro."

Even if we are influencing global warming, the degree cannot be shown simply because there have been events of similar magnitude in relatively recent times. There is absolutely no evidence that these floods and cyclones are anything but natural.



Quote:
Your link has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument.


Wrong!

You said:

Quote:
The Gore smoking gun is the separation of the carbon and temperature graphs, to hide the fact that temp. rises before carbon. You can't miss a smoking gun when it's pointed at you.


I showed you that there is no smoking gun.

The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)

“Doesn’t the relationship between CO2 and temperature in the ice core record show that temperature drives CO2, not the other way round?”

On the face of it, it sounds like a reasonable question. It is no surprise that it comes up because it is one of the most popular claims made by the global warming sceptics. It got a particularly high profile airing a couple of weeks ago, when congressman Joe Barton brought it up to try to discredit Al Gore’s congressional testimony. Barton said:

In your movie, you display a timeline of temperature and compared to CO2 levels over a 600,000-year period as reconstructed from ice core samples. You indicate that this is conclusive proof of the link of increased CO2 emissions and global warming. A closer examination of these facts reveals something entirely different. I have an article from Science magazine which I will put into the record at the appropriate time that explains that historically, a rise in CO2 concentrations did not precede a rise in temperatures, but actually lagged temperature by 200 to 1,000 years. CO2 levels went up after the temperature rose. The temperature appears to drive CO2, not vice versa. On this point, Mr. Vice President, you’re not just off a little. You’re totally wrong.

Of course, those who’ve been paying attention will recognize that Gore is not wrong at all. This subject has been very well addressed in numerous places.

What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?

Loopy Radar - If, after reading all the above, you still insist that there is a smoking gun then I'm sorry but the problem is with your inability to take on-board new information.




My ability to take on new information is why I can no longer accept AGW. Because of my concern for the environment I used to somewhat skeptically take on board AGW. It seem to make some sense. However my initial skepticism was drawn from that involvement. I saw 1st hand how Greenies are herded into taking on nonsense like "Eden will be a desert in 20 years' because of the logging. Well that was 20 years ago.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#956806 - 05/02/2011 18:49 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Ben Sandilands]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
quote "Greens deputy leader Christine Milne says the cyclone is another example of why it is important to cut carbon pollution."

Howabout structural collapse from longhaul coal mining in National Parks, not to mention the 23 damaged creeks and rivers in NSW alone.
And a toxic dust diet for your children from open cut coal mining.
Then there is deadly hydrocarbons and benzene leaking from the Gulf of Mexico from oof-shore drilling.
And just in case the public wake up to this, a long term propaganda campaign to convince us that 'natural gas' is an environmental alternative because of low carbon emissions. But of course forget the bit about permanently screwing up aquifers and water tables.

Whether or not there is a global carbon tax NWO conspiracy, there is a political deception being played out. And as always and w'out exeption. it is to benefit big business. As I have said previously, the very polluters sponsor the corporate media and current government that are pushing it.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#956837 - 05/02/2011 19:33 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Loopy Radar]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Unprecedented Arctic warming?
Scary stuff apparently - but make sure you read the VERY important note at the end...

http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/2011/02/unprecedented-arctic-warming/
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#956853 - 05/02/2011 19:55 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Loopy Radar]
Ben Sandilands Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/09/2006
Posts: 1252
Loc: Southern highlands NSW
Loopy Radar,

You make some relevant criticisms of the corruption of the message (sometimes manifesting itself on the other side in such wild claims as a conspiracy over ice core measures to mask 330 ppm of CO2 as far back as several centuries). Personally I came to the conclusion that I couldn't ignore the peer review process or the scientific consensus because even though such review runs into 'silo' mentalities and the risk of suppression of contrary views, the contrary view claims widespread scientific support as well, as thus ought to be able to get peer review support for its rebuttals.

There may be peer reviewed (and supportive) rebuttals, although I'm unaware of anything on the scale of peer reviewed support.

This may change. It would be refreshing to see a large fraction of the scientific community examine a rebuttal theory and validate it, because I really don't like what I reluctantly accept as a broadly correct (if outrageously misrepresented) position.

I want 'my' glaciers and highland snow back, especially this afternoon when it is a cool 32C at 737 metres at sunset and the forecast storms have not materialised.



Edited by Ben Sandilands (05/02/2011 19:57)

Top
#956858 - 05/02/2011 19:59 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Ben Sandilands]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA

Top
#956859 - 05/02/2011 20:00 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA

Top
#956880 - 05/02/2011 20:32 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Ben Sandilands]
Loopy Radar Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 05/10/2010
Posts: 880
Loc: Lismore NSW
Originally Posted By: Ben Sandilands
Loopy Radar,

You make some relevant criticisms of the corruption of the message (sometimes manifesting itself on the other side in such wild claims as a conspiracy over ice core measures to mask 330 ppm of CO2 as far back as several centuries). Personally I came to the conclusion that I couldn't ignore the peer review process or the scientific consensus because even though such review runs into 'silo' mentalities and the risk of suppression of contrary views, the contrary view claims widespread scientific support as well, as thus ought to be able to get peer review support for its rebuttals.

There may be peer reviewed (and supportive) rebuttals, although I'm unaware of anything on the scale of peer reviewed support.

This may change. It would be refreshing to see a large fraction of the scientific community examine a rebuttal theory and validate it, because I really don't like what I reluctantly accept as a broadly correct (if outrageously misrepresented) position.

I want 'my' glaciers and highland snow back, especially this afternoon when it is a cool 32C at 737 metres at sunset and the forecast storms have not materialised.



Even in recent times there are incredible examples of scientists struggle to get their claims verified. Off the top of my head I can think of two. Both featured in docos (can't remember names) I saw on SBS. One is the story of the lady with a cancer that lived on even after her death. Anyway a lone scientist was convinced that this cancer had spread throughout the world into many labratories infecting samples. Of course he was rebutted, but eventually proven correct. The other story is about lady Melbourne scientist that claimed that nanobes are a living organism. It took 10 years to prove her right.
History is plagued with examples of minorities right down to single persons being proved right over a majority.
_________________________
It's going to be a great storm season... somewhere else!

Top
#956889 - 05/02/2011 20:47 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Loopy Radar]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6033
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
One is the story of the lady with a cancer that lived on even after her death....
maybe it had been better to say, "One is the story of a lady with cancer, and the cancer lived on after her death"!
(When I read it first, I thought "the lady with cancer lived on after her death!")

Top
#956901 - 05/02/2011 21:08 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: bd bucketingdown]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
Man, when you get a hang up on something Ben, like ice cores being THE only true and accurate record of past CO2 levels, you really get hung up, don't you?
Nope, nothing else is correct except what Ben Sandilands says is correct.

Another group of scientists say that fossil plant leaf stomata indicate that CO2 levels may well have been around 310, 330 ppm way back but they are obviously cranks and not worthy of even considering their work because Ben Sandilands says so because he believes implicitly that ONLY the ice core records of CO2 levels of 290 ppm are totally correct and this despite all sorts of admitted calibration problems with ice cores.

LR got it right.
The biggest advances in mankind's very existence and in his development of technologies that have created our modern civilisation came not from those who toed the consensus line but from those who were mavericks and could and did think way ahead of and far outside of the the beliefs of the established science and belief systems.

The science is never settled, ever!

Top
#956902 - 05/02/2011 21:09 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW - Archive [Re: Loopy Radar]
Ben Sandilands Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/09/2006
Posts: 1252
Loc: Southern highlands NSW
You are also right in my opinion about lone or minority voices, and I should add that in over 50 years as a reporter, I can think of tobacco, asbestos, DDT, and the levels of ionising radiation which troops could withstand in a battle field peppered with 20 kilotonne atom bomb blasts as classic examples of the suppression of science by very powerful interests.

That questioning of 'divine or ordained' wisdom by the assorted establishments is no longer strong in the general media, which generally, tends to fall into camps and defend them, that is, some media is strongly anti AGW, some strongly pro, and sadly, on either side, the arguments are often supported by voices that are variously corrupt, or fraudulent, or claim to be what they aren't, or are paid by the vested interests or so forth.

It is a tragic situation from my point of view, and not one that social media, which tends to be self filtering and silo oriented, seems equipped to tackle other than by a lying competition.

In the 80s the established media refused to believe synthetic halons existed, or that global warming existed, and the popular view here, that AGW doesn't exist, was in fact the strongly and widely publicised establishment supported view right up until at least the mid 90s, if not early naughties.

The best that the media can do is question the fairy tales and conspiracy theories and culture warriors on either extreme, and foster public interest in the science. There are a lot of fairy tales and conspiracy theories to target. Those who have followed my own reports elsewhere will know that I have been fiercely attacked by the AGW extremists for pointing out very early, in 2007, that the sun was going quiet and might come into play as a moderating influence in the current weather. (Well the sun did go quiet, but not with anything like the affect I was hoping for, so far.) Similarly I was pilloried for daring to report that ice shelf calving had little if any relationship to climate change.

Similarly in this forum I'm unpopular for attacking absurd claims by the coolistas, and especially for pointing out the the GISS is actually the prime solar/climate relationship research body on the planet and that research into cosmic and solar influences on weather and climate is at an all time high.

There is, to be rude, a childish re-invention of the recent history of climate research on this forum from some posters, and a wonderful habit of quoting media reports about climate matters to prove that the media doesn't report on climate matters. Go figure.

But at least it is entertaining.



Edited by Ben Sandilands (05/02/2011 21:16)
Edit Reason: Grandma n tpoes

Top
Page 80 of 323 < 1 2 ... 78 79 80 81 82 ... 322 323 >


Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
4 registered (chasers addict, Sandbank, DDstorm, kizz), 331 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
egor gozlow, les4saisons, Miss_mischiff, Rigsy
Forum Stats
29700 Members
32 Forums
23996 Topics
1502371 Posts

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