Devonian

In a word, dogma.

I have an electric bike. It enables me to commute 12 miles to work and climb the 800 ft back home. Would I do that with a conventional bike? No, I've just never been that fit. Does an electric bike mean I get unfit? It's the opposite - it only does some of the work you know and if I didn't use it I'd be driving a car to work. I can't see how that would make me fitter or be better for the environment?

I think I've asked something like this before... but if there is a mass of water to cool down (as there is in eg the East Siberian Sea) will it be cooled more if it's still and the ice forms as frazel or if it's turbulent and you get pancakes that freeze together (if that's how it will work)? Put another way, could a layer of ice trap more heat below depending on how it was formed? It looks to be well below freezing in the area (mins about -8 around the New Siberian Islands) might it almost flash freeze?

First noticeable sea ice along the Siberian coast...And it's amazing to be posting such an observation in late October!

'Wonderful' isn't it... It's like being on ship accelerating towards a huge (ironically obviously) iceberg. You give warnings, you point out its getting closer and closer and that a change of direction is needed. People accuse you of lying, of wanting to spoil the party, of being a scaremonger - some even deny there is an iceberg. You resign yourself to the reality that the complacent and careless are going to take you down with them - indeed you'll probably be shouted at by said people for not doing anything to help them as you sink under the waves...

Shouting doesn't make you right...

If we, as a species, are to ignorant, to glib, to careless, to do so little that CO2 continues to rise and land ice melts then ocean circulation will stop, the seas will stratify and stagnate and god only knows what will happen to atmospheric circulation, rainfall and trees.

It looks to be a lot more than .2C to me. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/

I very much doubt it's all due to human caused climate change - otoh, if there have always been bush fires then it can't be the fault of bad farming practices either. I also can't ignore the reality that last year was the warmest and driest in the detailed climate record. You're not going to see record numbers of bush fires in a record wet summer - we'd all accept that? However, the test of how serious these fires were will be in a few years time. Then we'll see if the talk of hundreds of millions of animals lost and species made extinct is correct, the talk of how this sort of event will be the norm likewise. My hope is it all recovers, that wetter and cooler years return, I hope I'll not get called names for fearing (based upon my understanding of what is going on) that might not be the case.

You're soft skinned. When you've also been called a liar, a fraud, and had death threats (all of which repeated for years) then I'll take your words as serious. Btw, no one is accusing you of cheery picking, its not an accusation it's a reality. You've pick one weather station and try to draw global (or at least meaningful) conclusions from that one station.. C'mon

Is there some thing, some data, some evidence that makes you think that atmosphere physics is better understood by Roger than by people at Hadley Centre, or NOAA ,or GISS or indeed the IPCC? Or, put another way, what scientific something might Roger be onto?

And all 'we' want is for him to take that next step - too explain the 'how'. We've seen umpteen, lengthy posts about his beliefs. Arm waving, assertion and little asides about conspiracies doesn't cut it for me.

Lots of words, but not a word to back up your alternative theory of atmosphere physics...

How about winters are more likely to be affected by the greater changes to the Arctic climate (caused by AGW plus Arctic amplification) than summers because atmospheric circulation is more vigorous in the winter and sluggish in the summer so the effect of changes to the Arctic on weather is greater in the former than the latter?

'hide'? You give your prejudices away there Roger... As to your study, well, unless you have studied other record nearby, let alone a bigger area, how do we know you're not (to use another word you have, so it's fair game) trying to 'mislead' by the use of carefully picked cherries? Why just Toronto v just the CET? Have you done those check, those comparisons? Have you seen how the CET compares with other cities in Canada? How does it compare with Montreal, or Halifax, or Vancover? indeed, how does Toronto compare with Halifax?

Born, a couple of questions. 1, I should know what paper that graphic is from but I don't... 2, the dotted lines are the 99% confidence lines? 3, what effect would a big event (or how big an event?) would it need to be to show as sudden a cooling (I can't think of a natural sudden warming event) of the same magnitude as we see atm? Toba would be bigger, 1816 smaller? 4, would such an event show up in the kind of proxies that the graphic used to produce (I'm sure it would?)? 5, and are people still working on temperature reconstructions, or have they exhausted the proxies available?

I hope you can continue without words like 'idiocy' 'fooled', 'paranoia', 'bogus', 'zealots' - that is the language of a closed mind not of someone putting forward a 'plausible' theory.. A few million less words per post might not come amiss too.......

This one? Ask a question? Ask a question about what you're not sure about?

Humm, OT but the 80s were wonderful? Millions of jobs and livelihoods cast onto the scrap heap, civil unrest, the ideology that set off the deep divisions we now see set into political concrete... If only we still had the positive changes the 00s brought (low tax on small cars, subsidised clean energy generation) we'd be living in a cleaner, less polluted country.

This must be the climate election - Greens WWW.BBC.CO.UK Co-leader Sian Berry urges £100bn a year to be spent on climate action at the party's campaign launch. I must say that if you think the evidence is correct then it perfectly rational to think it is the most serious issue we face. I think the evidence is correct. However air quality is obviously the most serious problem Delhi has atm - but the people there seem to just cough, wheeze and just shrug their shoulders. Shrugging is a big problem too...

There you go again... What have I done to deserve being call 'pious'? I have my say and for that I get attacks I am, reasonably, intelligent. I've been interested in weather and climate all my life - I'm 61 years old. I'm an amateur, but i think the professionals know their jobs. To me the evidence and data is abundantly clear. We need to act because if we don't the state of the planet will continue to be degraded. What response will I get for daring to think and say that? Would it be 'OK, thanks, I'll look at and read the links you've supplied' or another personalised attack?

And another reply implying something of me. I love life to - why wouldn't I? Why do you feel the need to attack me in such a way? I'm sure you love life, so do I - all of it. We're alike, we both love life Again, taking positive steps is a choice. I chose to take those steps. I'm perfectly happy not flying around the world. I don't feel the need to drive a huge car - my little old super mini is fun enough and practical. Fwiw I can't stand burgers either, I know what they're made of and how, so no thanks - but I've no problem if you do. Enjoy.

Why is your reply implying something about me me rather than talking about what I said? Are you smug? Does saying that of each other help? No it does not. You asked what you should do. I answered you pointing to how serious the problems are and that you can indeed act or still chose not to.

You either accept the science, the evidence and the data, and act accordingly, or you can ignore it (and in some chose to hurl abuse at said science, scientists or people who understand, it instead). It's your choice, I know what mine is mine

This is something like how I'd hope climate change conversations would go here: Poster #1"If you look at the available evidence and data it's clear (to me, and most scientists) the world is warming, that the warming is due to humanities activities, and some major changes are on the way" Poster #2 "Humm, I'm not convinced. I do accept you're genuinely concerned and have done some studying. Can you point me to what it, what evidence and data, is that makes you think the way you do please?" #1 : "Sure [posts links]" #2 " thanks, I'll take a look" But instead we get something like: #1 "If you look at the available evidence and data....." #2 "You're pathetic" ...