250 replies to this topic

[Turnedoutniceagain]

Pete Tattum, on 07 January 2010 - 12:43 , said:

More importantly peeps, none of the Climategate nonsense (talk about red herrings!) negates the fact that we are in a warming world??

And it was ever thus. I can only assume the Vikings were being ironic when they called their new discovery Greenland !!

[Devonian]

Turnedoutniceagain, on 07 January 2010 - 13:32 , said:

And it was ever thus. I can only assume the Vikings were being ironic when they called their new discovery Greenland !!

Close but think instead of estate agents...

Edited by Devonian, 07 January 2010 - 14:11 .

[Solar Sausage]

Turnedoutniceagain, on 07 January 2010 - 13:32 , said:

And it was ever thus. I can only assume the Vikings were being ironic when they called their new discovery Greenland !!

Probably no more so, than when European settlers decided to call Manhattan Island New York???

[Thundery wintry showers]

Gray-Wolf, on 07 January 2010 - 12:38 , said:

So if I took all of your love letters out of your file TWS, photo copied them, and gave them out to all and sundry, it'd just by impacting your privacy and taking them out of the file would not be theft so long as I put them back?

Can cyberspace really change morality that much or is it merely an excuse for the times we live in?

If you took something away from me, made copies without consent and then gave it back, that would actually make you guilty of two offences- stealing (the initial act of taking it away is theft, even if you subsequently give it back) and then copying without consent.

Just because I'm pointing out that copying and theft aren't the same, it doesn't mean that I think copying is always acceptable. In some cases a modest amount of copying can be beneficial, but in other cases, copying can be even more damaging than theft is, and leaking sensitive information on a large scale often falls into the latter category. Copying is not a morally black and white issue- it all hinges on what is being copied, and on how large a scale the copies are distributed. That's why it's important that people see it for what it is instead of seeing it for what theft is.

Good posts by Pete Tattum and Sunny Starry Skies- after all, if the modes of natural variability have moved towards more neutral phases than they were in the 1990s, then why haven't we cooled as a result? There must be a background warming trend coming from somewhere else to offset them.

[rob48]

Devonian, on 07 January 2010 - 09:05 , said:

Well, if cynicism and snark melted ice the roads would be perfect...

As it is in reality councils set budgets, they have to plan ahead. But, you wouldn't complain about wasted taxpayer money if your council had a mountain of expensive salt left in May and had bought ten new £100,000 snow ploughs only used once a decade would you...



'Beardy-halfwit' eh? Good thoughtful stuff - not.



You allege financial and scientific corruption and are persistently condescending. I would bin your mail (especially given your 'haha') but expect someone will do you the courtesy (not that you showed it at all) of replying...

Yes, they have to plan ahead.


Perhaps they struggle because they take the advice of the Met Office and CLIMATE CHANGE organisation and thus no longer plan for colder than average winters.


Regarding waste, if that was all that they wasted I'd be rather pleased.

[Gray-Wolf]

They do use salt on melted road tar over summer Dev!

I seem to remember this from the 03' 'Arctic Summer' we suffered (oh to be blessed with a memory eh....what a cold decade we had to suffer?)

[mike Meehan]

I cannot show that CO2 will not add to Global Warming because physics show that it has this property, so this part is unarguable. However, the amount this is contributing is. Nor do we fully understand the earth's mechanism of controlling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. There have been times in the Earth's history when much much more CO2 has been released through volcanic eruptions and the Earth's "Control System" appears to have coped with it; otherwise we would not be here today.

CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas, water vapour and methane are others.

On newsnight about a couple of weeks ago a man was expounding the argument that the man-made CO2 was responsible for GW and that it it been rising since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Prior to this, he said the CO2 levels were more or less constant. I take it from this that the CO2 did NOT cause the warm period during Roman Times or the Medieval Warm spell when it appears that the climate was if anything warmer than it currently is i.e. grapes ripening in North of England and the Viking settlements in Greenland, so called because it was green.

This being the case there must have been some other reasons for the constant heating and cooling of our climate and I suspect that such heating or cooling is occuring through a multitude of different causes which come together to produce the effect. At one extreme we get a full blown Ice Age and at the other a much warmer climate than we have now.

I am sure that the climatology scientists are very sincere in their research but I do wonder whether they get too blinkered in their own detail and perhaps it would be a good idea to stand back and look at the situation as a whole.

Meanwhile different governments have jumped on the band wagon and used the situation to impose stealth carbon taxes and have been trying to keep the general public duped for as long as possible.

I agree that we should keep man made CO2 in check but there is only a limited supply of fossil fuels and in the blink of an eye in geological terms this will run out.

Meanwhile we should make efforts to source the methane produced from rotting rubbish and use it to provide power. I'm afraid we can't do anything about cows farting yet but if we are still to enjoy our steaks, butter, milk and cheese they are essential.

Edited by mike Meehan, 07 January 2010 - 18:53 .

[Solar Cycles]

Thundery wintry showers, on 07 January 2010 - 15:29 , said:

If you took something away from me, made copies without consent and then gave it back, that would actually make you guilty of two offences- stealing (the initial act of taking it away is theft, even if you subsequently give it back) and then copying without consent.

Just because I'm pointing out that copying and theft aren't the same, it doesn't mean that I think copying is always acceptable. In some cases a modest amount of copying can be beneficial, but in other cases, copying can be even more damaging than theft is, and leaking sensitive information on a large scale often falls into the latter category. Copying is not a morally black and white issue- it all hinges on what is being copied, and on how large a scale the copies are distributed. That's why it's important that people see it for what it is instead of seeing it for what theft is.

Good posts by Pete Tattum and Sunny Starry Skies- after all, if the modes of natural variability have moved towards more neutral phases than they were in the 1990s, then why haven't we cooled as a result? There must be a background warming trend coming from somewhere else to offset them.

But most of us are aware of a background warming trend, but as of yet, no one can prove what is causing that warming. And so the circle of doubt continues!

[Gray-Wolf]

mike Meehan, on 07 January 2010 - 18:51 , said:

I cannot show that CO2 will not add to Global Warming because physics show that it has this property, so this part is unarguable. However, the amount this is contributing is. Nor do we fully understand the earth's mechanism of controlling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. There have been times in the Earth's history when much much more CO2 has been released through volcanic eruptions and the Earth's "Control System" appears to have coped with it; otherwise we would not be here today.

CO2 is not the only greenhouse gas, water vapour and methane are others.

On newsnight about a couple of weeks ago a man was expounding the argument that the man-made CO2 was responsible for GW and that it it been rising since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. Prior to this, he said the CO2 levels were more or less constant. I take it from this that the CO2 did NOT cause the warm period during Roman Times or the Medieval Warm spell when it appears that the climate was if anything warmer than it currently is i.e. grapes ripening in North of England and the Viking settlements in Greenland, so called because it was green.

This being the case there must have been some other reasons for the constant heating and cooling of our climate and I suspect that such heating or cooling is occuring through a multitude of different causes which come together to produce the effect. At one extreme we get a full blown Ice Age and at the other a much warmer climate than we have now.

I am sure that the climatology scientists are very sincere in their research but I do wonder whether they get too blinkered in their own detail and perhaps it would be a good idea to stand back and look at the situation as a whole.

Meanwhile different governments have jumped on the band wagon and used the situation to impose stealth carbon taxes and have been trying to keep the general public duped for as long as possible.

I agree that we should keep man made CO2 in check but there is only a limited supply of fossil fuels and in the blink of an eye in geological terms this will run out.

Meanwhile we should make efforts to source the methane produced from rotting rubbish and use it to provide power. I'm afraid we can't do anything about cows farting yet but if we are still to enjoy our steaks, butter, milk and cheese they are essential.

Is it not a worry that when we know old mother nature can naturally produce 'warm periods' (as you highlight) that we have put our greenhouse blanket in place?

If we are to believe the recent info on methane release and the NASA paper on water vapour then we are already beyond a point of no return and must hope that Mother N. does not put any 'warming trend' on.

Edited by Gray-Wolf, 07 January 2010 - 20:23 .

[Captain_Bobski]

Thundery wintry showers, on 07 January 2010 - 15:29 , said:

...if the modes of natural variability have moved towards more neutral phases than they were in the 1990s, then why haven't we cooled as a result? There must be a background warming trend coming from somewhere else to offset them.

Why would the movement of natural forcings towards neutral phases cause cooling? Surely we would need [i[negative[/i] phases to cause cooling. Would neutrality not simply lead to more neutral temperature trends (temperature stasis, if you like)? If so then is this not what we have seen over the last few decade or so?



CB

PS - I agree with you wholeheartedly on the theft issue. I've actually been making that exact same argument ever since Napster got into trouble all those years ago and the issue of copyright "theft" (or, more correctly, copyright infringement) became a pub talking point!

[Gray-Wolf]

Captain_Bobski, on 07 January 2010 - 19:47 , said:

Why would the movement of natural forcings towards neutral phases cause cooling? Surely we would need [i[negative[/i] phases to cause cooling. Would neutrality not simply lead to more neutral temperature trends (temperature stasis, if you like)? If so then is this not what we have seen over the last few decade or so?



CB

Happy New Year C-Bob!

Back in my old 'Beeb' days folk were mooting the onset of the PDO -ve 30yr cool down.

I know Jethro and I have been over this ad infinitum but what if 98' should have been the start of a 30yr 'cold period'?

As it pans out it's been trying to go neg since 98/99 but the numbers didn't quite get it there (a couple of neg moments but then neutral/positive again).

Could it be that we are in the middle of a neg phase but it's moderation by AGW has just given us the past 2 years of northern hemisphere cold winters instead of the old 60's/70's stylee of our youths?

As ever time alone will tell but if the global flatline should have been a global fall then we have our answer (and may the gods help us when it swings positive proper again).

[Thundery wintry showers]

My argument re. forcings runs as follows:
In the 1990s we had a bias towards El Nino events at the expense of La Nina events, and during an El Nino the global temperature rises by as much as 0.2C above what it would be if the ENSO state was neutral, as happened in 1998. During the 2000s the average state of ENSO has been close to neutral, so on that basis, all other things being equal I'd expect the 2000s to be up to 0.1C colder than the 1990s.

Then there's the state of the NAO- it's still been mainly positive in the 2000s, but less strongly so than in the 1990s. A positive NAO helps to generate warmer than average winter temperatures over the Northern Hemisphere as it results in a pattern of warm anomalies over Eurasia and cold anomalies over the oceans. Thus I would expect, all other things being equal, a decline of up to 0.1C from that, at least for the Northern Hemisphere temperature.

When I add those two together that's where I get my suspicion that the 2000s should have been 0.1-0.2C cooler than they have been. Of course, as Solar Cycles correctly pointed out, it doesn't automatically follow from this that AGW made up the difference as there are other factors to consider as well, but it's a line of evidence to support the position that AGW still exists to a significant degree.

[BLAST FROM THE PAST]

Anyone see the 10 o'clock news with the AGW report. They dismissed the cuurent NH cold and highlighted the warmth in Greece etc saying what unusual warmth. USA, W/N Europe all below normal. When looked at the 'unusual' smal area of warmth..to the east nearly ALL of Asia was...yep cold. It really was a sad attemtp to keep AGW alive

BFTP

[Mark Bayley]

BLAST FROM THE PAST, on 07 January 2010 - 22:11 , said:

Anyone see the 10 o'clock news with the AGW report. They dismissed the cuurent NH cold and highlighted the warmth in Greece etc saying what unusual warmth. USA, W/N Europe all below normal. When looked at the 'unusual' smal area of warmth..to the east nearly ALL of Asia was...yep cold. It really was a sad attemtp to keep AGW alive

BFTP

Yes, i have noticed them and the met office emphasizing areas that a warm yet not really mentioning areas that are cold. This met office report shows this. Although they show a map then don't mention anywhere else that is cold. Wouldn't one expect areas in Spain, Grease etc to be milder. The jet stream being further south would mean low pressure systems crashing into them bringing milder and wetter than average weather?

http://www.metoffice...r20100106b.html

[Gray-Wolf]

Ms Kirkwood on BBC news just mentioned the low temps in NW Scottyland saying the record low was set on jan 7th 03'. I'm taking this as a further omen for the summer where I expect to do the whole of the world cup in the garden (T.V. outside) in me shorts

[andymusic]

They had an expert on the bbc news 24 a day or so ago going on about the UK's cold and how it was a blip just for us (wrong - USA rest of Europe and Asia all freezing) - I had to laugh when he said that - I understand that climate and weather events are different but, the earth has been around for millions of years with temp increases and decreases - ice ages and warmer periods etc - so it has been affected by the sun's output and other earth bound factors over all that time and just like the weather (it adjusts itself to re-align the balance) - I feel the climate may well do a similar thing - mother nature cannot be controlled by governments and if any government thinks they can control the temp of the earth then they are sadly mistaken. I think over the coming couple of decades we will be going into a cooling period which will cause a complete upset to climate change scientists/governments - the earth has naturally cooled and warmed up for millions of years even before we humans came along and it will continue to do so "naturally"

excerpt from Joe B's latest Blog

THE STONES ARE PROPHETS!

Way back when winters were cold and there was no talk of Global warming, the Stones had a song called Winter. Since I think that this winter is precursor of winters to come, and a throwback to winters past, a few lines out from the song are required here. And it sure been a cold, cold winter and the wind ain't been blowin' from the south. It's sure been a cold, cold winter and a lotta love is all burned out. It sure been a hard, hard winter, my feet been draggin' 'cross the ground. And I hope it's gonna be a long, hot summer, and a lotta love will be burnin' bright. A great weather related song..from the greatest rock and roll band.. ever. Just another reason that we here in the states are thankful for europe.. and Britain!

Edited by andymusic, 08 January 2010 - 08:12 .

[Gray-Wolf]

Well theres a worry;

http://www.scienceda...00107183136.htm

increasing temps reduce trees ability to take up CO2......

[Devonian]

BLAST FROM THE PAST, on 07 January 2010 - 22:11 , said:

Anyone see the 10 o'clock news with the AGW report. They dismissed the cuurent NH cold and highlighted the warmth in Greece etc saying what unusual warmth.

No they did not, they put it into a context. They showed a globe with warm and cold areas - I suppose they could have coloured the warm areas blue to make you happy

Quote

USA, W/N Europe all below normal. When looked at the 'unusual' smal area of warmth..to the east nearly ALL of Asia was...yep cold. It really was a sad attemtp to keep AGW alive

BFTP

So, you did see the map? It has been warm over the med, SW Asia, Africa, parts of Canada and the US. There is nothing 'sad' about presenting the facts - except, perhaps, that some people refuse to see them?

andymusic, on 08 January 2010 - 07:56 , said:

They had an expert on the bbc news 24 a day or so ago going on about the UK's cold and how it was a blip just for us (wrong - USA rest of Europe and Asia all freezing) - I had to laugh when he said that - I understand that climate and weather events are different but, the earth has been around for millions of years with temp increases and decreases - ice ages and warmer periods etc - so it has been affected by the sun's output and other earth bound factors over all that time and just like the weather (it adjusts itself to re-align the balance) - I feel the climate may well do a similar thing - mother nature cannot be controlled by governments and if any government thinks they can control the temp of the earth then they are sadly mistaken. I think over the coming couple of decades we will be going into a cooling period which will cause a complete upset to climate change scientists/governments - the earth has naturally cooled and warmed up for millions of years even before we humans came along and it will continue to do so "naturally"

If mother nature cannot be controlled why did the passenger pigeon go extinct? if mother nature cannot be controlled how come vast tracts of this planet have been changed to farmland by our activities? if mother nature cannot be controlled how come fish are fished close to extinction in many places? Surely mother nature would stop these damaging effects on her?

Sorry, but 'mother nature' (well the planet) can and is being changed by our activities - and the atmosphere is not escaping that.

Oh, and btw, people like me want to see the amount of climate changing greenhouse gas we release into the atmosphere reduced. That is to REDUCE our effect on the climate not control it.

Quote

excerpt from Joe B's latest Blog

THE STONES ARE PROPHETS!

Way back when winters were cold and there was no talk of Global warming, the Stones had a song called Winter. Since I think that this winter is precursor of winters to come, and a throwback to winters past, a few lines out from the song are required here. And it sure been a cold, cold winter and the wind ain't been blowin' from the south. It's sure been a cold, cold winter and a lotta love is all burned out. It sure been a hard, hard winter, my feet been draggin' 'cross the ground. And I hope it's gonna be a long, hot summer, and a lotta love will be burnin' bright. A great weather related song..from the greatest rock and roll band.. ever. Just another reason that we here in the states are thankful for europe.. and Britain!

Blimey, he's forecasting cold weather - there's a thing eh

Edited by Devonian, 08 January 2010 - 08:51 .

[Dartmoor_Matt]

Devonian, on 08 January 2010 - 08:50 , said:

No they did not, they put it into a context. They showed a globe with warm and cold areas - I suppose they could have coloured the warm areas blue to make you happy

Really? Seemed very out of context to me, in a report on the cold here he highlighted the one area of warm in pretty much the whole of the N'ern Hemisphere and said that was unusual.

Surely whats 'unusual' is the fact that we aren't getting winds from the SW (which is the dominant direction and has been for a very long time) and instead getting from the North and East...

Anyway, I agree with BFTP on this one. Everyone in the house just laughed as well when it came on.

[Solar Sausage]

I'm sure I remember some folks suggesting that 2007 was going to be the start of an humungous run of cold winters? The reasons given (if I remember rightly?) were Natural Cycles, and that AGW doesn't exist...