359 replies to this topic

[laserguy]

rob48, on 19 December 2009 - 13:23 , said:

I'll be glad when this non-event drops out of the news agenda.


If I have to listen to ignoramus Prescott babble on about "when we did Kyoto" one more time I may well become extremely violent.


You'd think he'd have a secretary to molest at this time of year.

Why don't all us 'deniers' organise mass rallies and return the entertainment that the enviro-whackos at No-Hopenhagen have provided us with?
Dunno about mud throwing Dev,all the ground's so solid that we'll have to use snowballs. Ah I know,'tis only weather !

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Devonian, on 15 December 2009 - 08:55 , said:

Please, Roger, stop the incessant mud throwing of your recent posts, you're much better than that and, if you know so much about why the science is wrong, post that instead!

He has Dev for all and sundry to read. AGW has been shoved down people's throats as fact for far too long...at the very leats it is hugely overestimated, at worst it is lies.

BFTP

[masheeuk]

I don't think it matters which side of the fence you sit. This only proves that if there is no political advantage to be gained things, right or wrong, wont happen. There is no bigger group of people not interested in the science than polititians

[Devonian]

BLAST FROM THE PAST, on 19 December 2009 - 14:36 , said:

He has Dev for all and sundry to read. AGW has been shoved down people's throats as fact for far too long...at the very leats it is hugely overestimated, at worst it is lies.

BFTP

Then name the liars. Oh, AGW IS fact (in that there in climate change brought about by humans - or do you deny human produced CO2, CH4, NO2 and the rest are ghg's?). The question is the magnitude of AGW not if it exists.

Btw, remember that a lie is premeditate and meant to deceive. To accuse people, as you must to sustain such an attack, of lying is a very serious thing to allege of someone, something that is to often made these days by people with no better form of argument than personal stuff. NOT ONE allegation of lying of a climate scientist or climate science has been made to stick, it's mud slinging that's what it is

[Solar Cycles]

Devonian, on 19 December 2009 - 15:33 , said:

Then name the liars. Oh, AGW IS fact (in that there in climate change brought about by humans - or do you deny human produced CO2, CH4, NO2 and the rest are ghg's?). The question is the magnitude of AGW not if it exists.

Btw, remember that a lie is premeditate and meant to deceive. To accuse people, as you must to sustain such an attack, of lying is a very serious thing to allege of someone, something that is to often made these days by people with no better form of argument than personal stuff. NOT ONE allegation of lying of a climate scientist or climate science has been made to stick, it's mud slinging that's what it is

Just a little wry observation Dev. Scientist are human, humans are prone to error! With this in mind, it's odds on that some scientist have manipulated data, to suite one's own needs!!!

[The PIT]

Devonian, on 19 December 2009 - 15:33 , said:

Btw, remember that a lie is premeditate and meant to deceive. To accuse people, as you must to sustain such an attack, of lying is a very serious thing to allege of someone, something that is to often made these days by people with no better form of argument than personal stuff. NOT ONE allegation of lying of a climate scientist or climate science has been made to stick, it's mud slinging that's what it is

Funny has the enquiry finnished already ?????

[Solar Sausage]

I get the impression that (for whatever the reason) some folks think they already know what the Investigation will find?? I'd always thought that, in this country, one was presumed innocent until proven guilty...Evidently, this doesn't extend to climate scientists...

[laserguy]

Pete Tattum, on 19 December 2009 - 17:08 , said:

I get the impression that (for whatever the reason) some folks think they already know what the Investigation will find?? I'd always thought that, in this country, one was presumed innocent until proven guilty...Evidently, this doesn't extend to climate scientists...

Au contraire,Pete. Things seem to have gone very quiet on that front,presumably the investigation is going through the necessary channels and we all await the outcome before moving on. Being the outrageous cynic that I am,it's my guess that the whole thing has been suppressed until No-Hopenhagen is over - don't want to scupper proceedings now. Although it's probably fair to say that's happened without any 'outside help'. Personally,(and I emphasise that before Dev starts threatening lawsuits and suchlike),I'd be greasing the handcuffs up right now.

[johnholmes]

meantime the 'real' worry of Copenhagen is less, or should be, less about dodgy statistics, but rather having a plan in place as the earth continues, OVERALL, to warm.
Do we have a plan in place? do we rocks-nothing-zilch-an air fairy partial agreement for 6 countries.
talk about fiddle whilst Rome burnt

in 5 years time after no planning again, maybe after 2 years, they may try again-result almost certainly the same.
In 20 years or 50 years PERHAPS the world may wake up to the fact that some islands and coastal areas of mainland areas in the lower lying areas don't seem to have any Representatives.
I wonder why-maybe they got drowned or eventually moved to other countries so no longer have a need to try and get some sensible binding agreements for all countries.

end of jh rant

I'll not wind up the anti GW/AGW brigade any more but am sad that the grandchildren of my grandchildren are looking like being left with this can of worms!

[Dartmoor_Matt]

Just a small question, why would only "some" islands and low lying mainland areas lose representatives due to drowning? Are sea level rises not universal? Or does the earth wobble to flood only photogenic areas?

[Solar Cycles]

johnholmes, on 19 December 2009 - 17:45 , said:

meantime the 'real' worry of Copenhagen is less, or should be, less about dodgy statistics, but rather having a plan in place as the earth continues, OVERALL, to warm.
Do we have a plan in place? do we rocks-nothing-zilch-an air fairy partial agreement for 6 countries.
talk about fiddle whilst Rome burnt

in 5 years time after no planning again, maybe after 2 years, they may try again-result almost certainly the same.
In 20 years or 50 years PERHAPS the world may wake up to the fact that some islands and coastal areas of mainland areas in the lower lying areas don't seem to have any Representatives.
I wonder why-maybe they got drowned or eventually moved to other countries so no longer have a need to try and get some sensible binding agreements for all countries.

end of jh rant

I'll not wind up the anti GW/AGW brigade any more but am sad that the grandchildren of my grandchildren are looking like being left with this can of worms!

John you really need to keep off that Merlot!!

Dartmoor_Matt, on 19 December 2009 - 18:47 , said:

Just a small question, why would only "some" islands and low lying mainland areas lose representatives due to drowning? Are sea level rises not universal? Or does the earth wobble to flood only photogenic areas?

[The PIT]

Dartmoor_Matt, on 19 December 2009 - 18:47 , said:

Just a small question, why would only "some" islands and low lying mainland areas lose representatives due to drowning? Are sea level rises not universal? Or does the earth wobble to flood only photogenic areas?

I think most of the sea water accumalates near the equators so they will see the effect first. Of course the islands could be naturally sinking as well.

johnholmes, on 19 December 2009 - 17:45 , said:

meantime the 'real' worry of Copenhagen is less, or should be, less about dodgy statistics, but rather having a plan in place as the earth continues, OVERALL, to warm.
Do we have a plan in place? do we rocks-nothing-zilch-an air fairy partial agreement for 6 countries.
talk about fiddle whilst Rome burnt

in 5 years time after no planning again, maybe after 2 years, they may try again-result almost certainly the same.
In 20 years or 50 years PERHAPS the world may wake up to the fact that some islands and coastal areas of mainland areas in the lower lying areas don't seem to have any Representatives.
I wonder why-maybe they got drowned or eventually moved to other countries so no longer have a need to try and get some sensible binding agreements for all countries.

end of jh rant

I'll not wind up the anti GW/AGW brigade any more but am sad that the grandchildren of my grandchildren are looking like being left with this can of worms!

Err no John no real agreement. In the meantime we can arrange another meeting and fly and be driven there in co2 producing transport. Eat well talk a lot and raise taxes and tell scietenist to find or not to find warming depending on the agenda's at the time.

Edited by The PIT, 19 December 2009 - 22:31 .

[laserguy]

http://www.telegraph...a-Pachauri.html

Well whodathunkit??

[Cloudman]

Roger J Smith, on 14 December 2009 - 20:58 , said:

The event has become an event of Biblical proportions, at least in terms of "lying signs and wonders." And it's a media circus, because the media are drawn to these protestors as fellow travellers, I'm sure you get the same distorted coverage. Here in Vancouver, ten people show up downtown, strip down to their undies to "save the planet" and the media are there. But three thousand skeptics meet in a conference and nobody hears a thing about it (except on the internet).

This is so transparently political that the scientific community at large should be getting suspicious about the science involved. For example, there's the issue of the re-formatting of data to show that the MWP was not as warm as the 20th century, something not widely accepted before this issue became politicized. And it's an important issue, because if the MWP was as warm as the late 20th century, then it demonstrates that these levels can be sustained by the natural variability of the system at this point in the longer-term Milankovitch cycles.

And that reminds us that many tend to forget that we have already passed the optimum conditions of this inter-glacial, and that perhaps our attention should be more on the other side of the climate road ahead, where human intervention might be more plausible. I would submit, it would be relatively easier for the human race to prevent cooling of the planet than warming. We've already figured out one way to warm the planet, but there are others. And in the longer term, we may need to be doing that to forestall glaciation in the distant future.

Even a shift to a "Little Ice Age" climate would be economically more challenging than a sea level rise of one metre, and this is certainly at least as possible as the warming outcome, yet nothing is said or done about that.

The "climate activists" are in reality political activists who want a communist form of government, world-wide if possible, with everything else that would come along with that. Or perhaps I am giving them too much credit, because some of them seem entirely empty-headed, just attracted by the "bovver" factor, it might be better to call them climate hooligans. One imagines them touring the ice margins of Greenland firing off salvos of liquid nitrogen to "defeat the heat" then making love to polar bears to show their solidarity with the beasts of the earth. Or was that on the news last night?

Sounds like the nonsense you get from those who do not understand the science, the first decade of the 21 st century was the warmest in the instrumental record, almost certainly the warmest for the last 1000 years, probably at least 2000 years. There is also no dobt that much of the warming in the last century was man made. It fits closely with the predicted warming from man made fgreenhouse gases and cannot be explained in any other way

[Devonian]

laserguy, on 20 December 2009 - 16:51 , said:

http://www.telegraph...a-Pachauri.html

Well whodathunkit??

More politics.

Anyway, I'll go with the flow...

So, being a business man, a capitalist even, is a bad thing now is it? Or only if your not a card carrying 'slash and burn the planet for profit' club member? Sheeshh. I wish you sceptics would stick to you ultra capitalist guns rather than flip floping about to score points. You should be approving Dr P.s business acumen - surely???

Edited by Devonian, 20 December 2009 - 18:35 .

[laserguy]

Devonian, on 20 December 2009 - 18:35 , said:

So, being a business man, a capitalist even, is a bad thing now is it? Or only if your not a card carrying 'slash and burn the planet for profit' club member? Sheeshh. I wish you sceptics would stick to you ultra capitalist guns rather than flip floping about to score points. You should be approving Dr P.s business acumen - surely???

Only if you work for Exxon. This guy and his buddy Al (to name but two out of a 'workforce' of millions) make the chief exec of said organisation look like an environmental and moral saint.

Honestly Dev,you really are so far gone that you're outta sight. I am now in no doubt whatsoever that you are beyond salvation.

[Devonian]

laserguy, on 20 December 2009 - 18:53 , said:

Only if you work for Exxon. This guy and his buddy Al (to name but two out of a 'workforce' of millions) make the chief exec of said organisation look like an environmental and moral saint.

Honestly Dev,you really are so far gone that you're outta sight. I am now in no doubt whatsoever that you are beyond salvation.

Well, if asking questions is beyond salvation, then I hold my hand up to that 'crime'.

But, of course, the article is another example of 'New scepticism'. New scepticism makes no pretence to be about science it simply throws mud - as much as it can, using any excuse up to an including law breaking. That's the divide that has opened up since the email thefts. On one side science, on the other mud throwing. Again, I hold my hand up, to be counted for science

Edited by Devonian, 20 December 2009 - 19:05 .

[rob48]

" almost certainly the warmest for the last 1000 years, probably at least 2000 years."


Only 2000 years?


Why stop guessing there?

[The PIT]

Devonian, on 20 December 2009 - 18:35 , said:

More politics.

Anyway, I'll go with the flow...

So, being a business man, a capitalist even, is a bad thing now is it? Or only if your not a card carrying 'slash and burn the planet for profit' club member? Sheeshh. I wish you sceptics would stick to you ultra capitalist guns rather than flip floping about to score points. You should be approving Dr P.s business acumen - surely???

LOL but if he was sceptic being paid by BP for example you would point ot be BP wouldn't you.

Question here is the conflict of interest.

[La Bise]

All I can say is that I hope the "sceptics" are right now. They have won the battle, as far as I'm concerned and it will be inaction from then on so that the world communist order does not rise, taxes are not raised and we can all consume, consume, consume, consume out of our free will. What always motivated their crusade for truth was always the purity of the quest, not selfish self-interest, oh no...

I think as it is near to Christmas, a little Luke 23:34 might be appropriate to sum up the whole sorry business(not that I'm anything more than a very, very lapsed catholic nowadays...)