Un To Release Latest Update To Global Warming

[Danny Deflation]

There are two ways to look at the global warming discussion:

1. Read and understand peer-reviewed scientific research which suggests that humans MOST VERY LIKELY contribute to climate change or...

2. Suck on your spliff and quote David Icke.

[Bloo Loo]

So is your tenet that atmospheric CO2 doesn't affect temperature and so climate ?

Everything you do affects something..

whether it is of consequence is another matter.

95% of the UN pick of the bunch think we are guilty as charged.

Maverick scientists disagree...the press vilify them for looking at the exact same science and coming to a different conclusion. thats bad for people selling carbon credits and Governments wanting to tax air travel.

What I do know is we arent draining the seas...but we have deforested masses of the Earths surface...

[Bloo Loo]

There are two ways to look at the global warming discussion:

1. Read and understand peer-reviewed scientific research which suggests that humans MOST VERY LIKELY contribute to climate change or...

2. Suck on your spliff and quote David Icke.

see how the words have changed...from caused to contributed most likely is suggested.

I dont know what Mr Ike says about MMGW.

I do know that the climate changes..it always has..it always will.

[LiveinHope]

What I do know is we arent draining the seas...but we have deforested masses of the Earths surface...

Are you sure about that ? No effects in the sea ?

[Bloo Loo]

Are you sure about that ? No effects in the sea ?

What I am sure of, as I predicted up thread, a poster on the main forum points to someone ( a scientist) calling for renewed vigour on carbon credits to control this. You see, he can work out we are all going to die due to carbon, but he cant see a simple way to control it...or maybe he can and is being PAID to suggest a certain route.

He fails to suggest we stop digging the stuff out of the ground..he fails to see that would put prices up just the same.

course, the rogues of the World will build the cheapest dirtiest power sources they can to avoid the costs...just the same as they avoid carbon credits today and tomorrow.

[Guest eight]

Are you sure about that ? No effects in the sea ?

I tell you what, the sea off Redcar doesn't half taste of CO2!

A least, I hope it was CO2.....

[LiveinHope]

What I am sure of, as I predicted up thread, a poster on the main forum points to someone ( a scientist) calling for renewed vigour on carbon credits to control this. You see, he can work out we are all going to die due to carbon, but he cant see a simple way to control it...or maybe he can and is being PAID to suggest a certain route.

He fails to suggest we stop digging the stuff out of the ground..he fails to see that would put prices up just the same.

course, the rogues of the World will build the cheapest dirtiest power sources they can to avoid the costs...just the same as they avoid carbon credits today and tomorrow.

So, you are against carbon credits and so therefore MMGW is a myth - ? I have probably misinterpreted you

It is pointed out ad nauseam that we need to stop oxidising the stuff at the rate we are doing so - you could say 'digging it out the ground'.

We therefore need alternative sources of generating power.

You could argue that the electorate would elect Governments that would both invest in non C sources and also work to reduce general domestic consumption - if given the choice at the ballot box.

The fact that our governments choose to use tax as their vehicle to bring abut change is not the fault of the scientists bringing the message.

You just have to look at the state of energy supply in the UK to see how short-termist governments have been.

oh and bye bye marine food chain

[Bloo Loo]

So, you are against carbon credits and so therefore MMGW is a myth - ? I have probably misinterpreted you

snip

The fact that our governments choose to use tax as their vehicle to bring abut change is not the fault of the scientists bringing the message.

You just have to look at the state of energy supply in the UK to see how short-termist governments have been.

oh and bye bye marine food chain

I didnt say MMGW is a myth...I said I dont beleive what I am being told about it, and the causes of it.

I am however, as you go on to say, that I am very suspicious of the motives of parties publishing reports, and governments that support them, especially in a time of severe banking issues, a bubble in unsustainable Government debt taking, and War mongering.

Having read a little of the aims of the IPCC, I can see that a major part of its own activities is based on the assumption that GW is something we caused and need to deal with... from their web site:

The IPCC Working Group III (WG III) assesses options for mitigating climate change through limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing activities that remove them from the atmosphere. The main economic sectors are taken into account, both in a near-term and in a long-term perspective. The sectors include energy, transport, buildings, industry, agriculture, forestry, waste management. The WG analyses the costs and benefits of the different approaches to mitigation, considering also the available instruments and policy measures. The approach is more and more solution-oriented.

The Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) was established by the IPCC to oversee the IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme (IPCC-NGGIP). The core activity is to develop and refine an internationally-agreed methodology and software for the calculation and reporting of national GHG emissions and removals and to encourage its use by countries participating in the IPCC and by parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The NGGIP also established and maintains an Emission Factor Database.

The WG 1 and 2 have the ostensible functions of observing and gathering data. worthy. But it is all capped off with the above...Now, if this was all the result of the results of WG1 and 2, then yes, its sensible, but thats not what is happening, WG3 is part of the entire program, therefore, any results in WG1 and 2 have to be published with WG3 in mind...that is the nature of this type of organisation...cant have embarassed officials having to face the press for the waste and pain and fear they are putting us through...the current flat period is possibly down to better measurements....but no...its El Nino and other effects that are too numerous to possibly mention.

this is my objection...the complete Politicisation of the process followed by IMMEDIATE calls for this cure or that cure, which usually involves paying someone else a lot of money.

[SHERWICK]

I didnt say MMGW is a myth...I said I dont beleive what I am being told about it, and the causes of it.

I am however, as you go on to say, that I am very suspicious of the motives of parties publishing reports, and governments that support them, especially in a time of severe banking issues, a bubble in unsustainable Government debt taking, and War mongering.

Having read a little of the aims of the IPCC, I can see that a major part of its own activities is based on the assumption that GW is something we caused and need to deal with... from their web site:

The IPCC Working Group III (WG III) assesses options for mitigating climate change through limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing activities that remove them from the atmosphere. The main economic sectors are taken into account, both in a near-term and in a long-term perspective. The sectors include energy, transport, buildings, industry, agriculture, forestry, waste management. The WG analyses the costs and benefits of the different approaches to mitigation, considering also the available instruments and policy measures. The approach is more and more solution-oriented.

The Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) was established by the IPCC to oversee the IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme (IPCC-NGGIP). The core activity is to develop and refine an internationally-agreed methodology and software for the calculation and reporting of national GHG emissions and removals and to encourage its use by countries participating in the IPCC and by parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The NGGIP also established and maintains an Emission Factor Database.

The WG 1 and 2 have the ostensible functions of observing and gathering data. worthy. But it is all capped off with the above...Now, if this was all the result of the results of WG1 and 2, then yes, its sensible, but thats not what is happening, WG3 is part of the entire program, therefore, any results in WG1 and 2 have to be published with WG3 in mind...that is the nature of this type of organisation...cant have embarassed officials having to face the press for the waste and pain and fear they are putting us through...the current flat period is possibly down to better measurements....but no...its El Nino and other effects that are too numerous to possibly mention.

this is my objection...the complete Politicisation of the process followed by IMMEDIATE calls for this cure or that cure, which usually involves paying someone else a lot of money.

So you'd be much happier if governments left everything alone and up to 'market forces' to sort out then?

What exactly do you want to happen?

[Bloo Loo]

So you'd be much happier if governments left everything alone and up to 'market forces' to sort out then?

What exactly do you want to happen?

again, you are assuming there is a problem that A: needs sorting out, and B: we can sort out.

The very language of this debate is slanted to the "truth" that MMGW is a FACT.

greenhouse gases for one...Carbon credits for a second....cause, solution....but the solution has no effect on the cause other than in the mind of a business mogul somewhere...indeed, there doesnt even have to be a cause for the solution to be applied.

I recall about 20 years ago a scare about microwaves and childrens throats. All over the news, microwaving your childs food is DANGEROUS. I had a friend round who was disgusted I Microwaved my kids food...The reason?...she never really paid attention to what was the problem...just the hype...CHILD MICROWAVE DANGEROUS NEVER DO IT.

what was the actual problem,,,it was the narrow neck in some babies feed bottles...the narrow top bit, being narrower, wasnt cooled like the rest of the bottle was in the process of heating up...therefore the top bit of milk got very hot..the solution...shake the bottle and allow to cool..test it yourself before handing over...Indeed, the exact same advice for preparation of feed using ANY OTHER METHOD..heat, test and feed.

But the language used wasnt about food safety at all...it was about some silly people failing to consider what they were doing with their children.

And dont get me started on frost free fridges and why the food dries up in them....MRS and Baby LOOS!

[LiveinHope]

I didnt say MMGW is a myth...I said I dont beleive what I am being told about it, and the causes of it.

So what do you think are the causes of MMGW - or is it a myth - or is it less trees over the last 200 years ? The composition of the atmosphere has changed with respect to the 'greenhouse gas' CO2 over the last 200 years at a rate 100 x faster than it did at the end of the last ice age - and i don;t think that is due to a few less trees.

MMGW doesn't mean it won't ever get colder or it will get hotter. If the sun goes out no amount of MMGW will keep us warm.

If you agree that the atmospheric composition influences planetary temperatures It means that natural cycles are now acting on an atmospheric composition of Earth that ice core evidence suggests is outside the boundaries of the last 800,000 years, and currently, we expect the trend for Global average temperatures to warm as a consequence with usual, high year to year variability.

The WG 1 and 2 have the ostensible functions of observing and gathering data. worthy. But it is all capped off with the above...Now, if this was all the result of the results of WG1 and 2, then yes, its sensible, but thats not what is happening, WG3 is part of the entire program, therefore, any results in WG1 and 2 have to be published with WG3 in mind...that is the nature of this type of organisation...cant have embarassed officials having to face the press for the waste and pain and fear they are putting us through...the current flat period is possibly down to better measurements....but no...its El Nino and other effects that are too numerous to possibly mention.

You are Alex Jones and I claim my £5.00

One thing I think we can both agree on is that these GW threads are a complete and utter, pointless waste of electricity carbon.

You can simply present the observations and the data - people then decide or choose what they want to hear or they can spin it to suit their conscience, always based upon their VI position.

[Bloo Loo]

So what do you think are the causes of MMGW - snip

I rest my case.

[LiveinHope]

again, you are assuming there is a problem that A: needs sorting out, and B: we can sort out.

The very language of this debate is slanted to the "truth" that MMGW is a FACT.

greenhouse gases for one...Carbon credits for a second....cause, solution....but the solution has no effect on the cause other than in the mind of a business mogul somewhere...indeed, there doesnt even have to be a cause for the solution to be applied.

I recall about 20 years ago a scare about microwaves and childrens throats. All over the news, microwaving your childs food is DANGEROUS. I had a friend round who was disgusted I Microwaved my kids food...The reason?...she never really paid attention to what was the problem...just the hype...CHILD MICROWAVE DANGEROUS NEVER DO IT.

what was the actual problem,,,it was the narrow neck in some babies feed bottles...the narrow top bit, being narrower, wasnt cooled like the rest of the bottle was in the process of heating up...therefore the top bit of milk got very hot..the solution...shake the bottle and allow to cool..test it yourself before handing over...Indeed, the exact same advice for preparation of feed using ANY OTHER METHOD..heat, test and feed.

But the language used wasnt about food safety at all...it was about some silly people failing to consider what they were doing with their children.

And dont get me started on frost free fridges and why the food dries up in them....MRS and Baby LOOS!

Perhaps you should stop reading the Daily Mail. Maybe your problem is that you read the interpretations of the science rather than the original science.

Perhaps I did you a disservice, perhaps you are not Alex Jones - perhaps you are James Delingpole - an interpreter of interpretations

[LiveinHope]

I rest my case.

Cheap swipe, I should have said GW - Now, how about engaging with the science.

[SHERWICK]

again, you are assuming there is a problem that A: needs sorting out, and B: we can sort out.

The very language of this debate is slanted to the "truth" that MMGW is a FACT.

greenhouse gases for one...Carbon credits for a second....cause, solution....but the solution has no effect on the cause other than in the mind of a business mogul somewhere...indeed, there doesnt even have to be a cause for the solution to be applied.

I recall about 20 years ago a scare about microwaves and childrens throats. All over the news, microwaving your childs food is DANGEROUS. I had a friend round who was disgusted I Microwaved my kids food...The reason?...she never really paid attention to what was the problem...just the hype...CHILD MICROWAVE DANGEROUS NEVER DO IT.

what was the actual problem,,,it was the narrow neck in some babies feed bottles...the narrow top bit, being narrower, wasnt cooled like the rest of the bottle was in the process of heating up...therefore the top bit of milk got very hot..the solution...shake the bottle and allow to cool..test it yourself before handing over...Indeed, the exact same advice for preparation of feed using ANY OTHER METHOD..heat, test and feed.

But the language used wasnt about food safety at all...it was about some silly people failing to consider what they were doing with their children.

And dont get me started on frost free fridges and why the food dries up in them....MRS and Baby LOOS!

Still doesn't answer the question: what would YOU like to see happen?

More research? If so, paid for by who?

Anything?

[LiveinHope]

But the language used wasnt about food safety at all...it was about some silly people failing to consider what they were doing with their children.

From post 400 on the Zimmerman thread.

SO, the frenzied reporting is about the outrage of getting 20 years for shooting the ceiling...but, the other side of the story, which the jury heard, is NOT mentioned...

So, the similarity between this case and the Zimmerman one is again, the press publish the ANGLE to sell papers/advertising, while the JURY hears to facts and the evidence.

[Bloo Loo]

From post 400 on the Zimmerman thread.

exactly...my point originally was that I didnt need to read the report to know what they were going to say. The science, if any, comes second.

And one more thing about the composition of the report, submitted by Volunteer science groups from all over the World...5% didnt agree, and thats from a pool willing to join the debate for an organisation where the assumption is already there that GW is MM.

As I said before, it is obvious that you do anything at all, every breath, every step, every tree cut or grown, has an effect. taxing these things wont cure the problem.

I have no issue with research Mr Sherwick. I dont suggest the measurements of temperature are wrong, or right. I do want the cleanest most natural air I and my kids can breath...and that includes CO2.

[Bloo Loo]

Cheap swipe, I should have said GW - Now, how about engaging with the science.

LOL, cheap swipe, absolutely, but it just goes to show how the language used almost forces the answer...Apologies if i embarassed you.

[LiveinHope]

I dont suggest the measurements of temperature are wrong, or right. I do want the cleanest most natural air I and my kids can breath...and that includes CO2.

I rest my case !

[Bloo Loo]

Perhaps you should stop reading the Daily Mail. Maybe your problem is that you read the interpretations of the science rather than the original science.

Perhaps I did you a disservice, perhaps you are not Alex Jones - perhaps you are James Delingpole - an interpreter of interpretations

Thanks for the vid...the straw man of example of consensus was entirely different to what is happening to climate science and its treatment by the press...in the case of the cancer, the medical experience will show that A: there is a symptom and B: a number of possible causes.

The consensus will be that they guess ( for that is what it is) what is the likely cause of the symptom for this particular patient...OK, they think the serious swelling on the Brain is as a result of the tumour in the Brain they discovered...the reasonable consensus is that the best guess is to stop whatever is causing the tumour and maybe to remove it.

this is not what has happened with MMGW...they have observed a rising temperature for a time..it seems out of kilter with the "norm"..they then look for a cause...they found one...now they must cure it....but, there is no patient showing symptoms...it does not seem to need a cure...but we can make money by saying if we dont do something, this flood, this famine, this coastline is going to disappear. In other words, the problem may or may not exist.

So to put the man in the dock by saying you will take the word of the MD about your cancer and not the word of the climatologist about something you dont have, or may never get, is mute.

Of course, the models they produced many years ago predicted the disasters we were going to get...they said temperatures were going to be higher than they are now...they failed to predict the flat spot....so maybe....just maybe, the symptom is not down to the cause they are trying to cure.

Note to self...check the measures of reforestation taking place over the last 15 years.

[Bloo Loo]

I rest my case !

I wouldnt if i were you. Im not a climate change denyer....the only thing constant about anything is change as my grandpappy used to say, before he became my grandma.

[LiveinHope]

LOL, cheap swipe, absolutely, but it just goes to show how the language used almost forces the answer...Apologies if i embarassed you.

No, not embarrassed at all - but thanks for the concern

I don't focus at all hard on what i type on an HPC GW thread. Broad, fast brush strokes. What this thread about ? oh MMGW, so "causes of MMGW', and relevant in the context of previous posts but not in the bigger picture. What are the causes of MMGW, is it less trees due to man, burning fossil fuels due to man, or as some have even argued, turning on radiators and warming the air ?

[LiveinHope]

[quote name='Bloo Loo' timestamp='1380364624' post='909400235')

Note to self...check the measures of reforestation taking place over the last 15 years.

have there been any tax incentives for planting trees ?

[Bloo Loo]

No, not embarrassed at all - but thanks for the concern

I don't focus at all hard on what i type on an HPC GW thread ? Broad, fast brush strokes. What this thread about ? oh MMGW, so "causes of MMGW', and relevant in the context of previous posts but not in the bigger picture. What are the causes of MMGW, is it less trees due to man, burning fossil fuels due to man, or as some have even argued, turning on radiators and warming the air ?

that would have been off topic..the thread was about the report...all I was saying was that you didnt need to read the report to know what they were going to say,doubled down by even more deviation when the report of the report was heard on the TV.

[LiveinHope]

that would have been off topic..the thread was about the report...all I was saying was that you didnt need to read the report to know what they were going to say,doubled down by even more deviation when the report of the report was heard on the TV.

As off topic as talking about clean air on a climate change thread !

Similar to saying ocean acidification is a consequence of climate change - you'll find that littered throughout the media.

Anyway - I think this has run its course for me -

best wishes

Out

(probably)