Climate Change Theory Degenerates into farce

[Gnome Chomsky]

Odd isn't it? The overwhelming scientific consensus doesn't mean anything to these people, but one scientist saying something else is all the evidence they need.

Incidentally, this scientist believes in AGW. Here is his position.

Professor Latif suggested that the long-term warming trend could be masked - perhaps for as long as 10 or 20 years - by a temporary cooling caused by natural fluctuations in currents and temperatures called the North Atlantic oscillation. "Thereafter," he told the Today programme, "temperatures will pick up again and continue to warm."

From the Guardian.

[Destiny's Soldier]

This appears to be a disingenuous post. Its old news that there may be a decade of cooler temperatures. A decade is neither here nor there in terms of climate change: if you look at graphs of past temperatures they look like sharks teeth, not a smooth curve. Its the long trend that matters.

I'm by no means an uncritical reader of climate change research, but the OP writer is well informed on climate change and must know that is an old story and doesn't have the significance that he suggests.

I used to respect your views Cactus.

"It's old news that there may be a decade of cooler temperatures". I think you should stop there.

We've already had a decade of cooling since 1998. And another 10 or 20 years of cooling to come will make it 30 years of cooling. And you think this is not a problem. How in God's name does that compute with runaway Global warming? How does that compute with our supposed highest CO2 levels since for 1000's of years?

It doesn't compute at all you see.

CO2 levels were higher in 1940 than they are today. One German Researcher (Kruetz) did 64,000 chemical tests of the atmosphere between 1939 and 1941 and CO2 levels were between 450 - 500 ppm (0.045 - 0.050 %). The maximum influence from industrial interference was estimated to range from 20ppm - 70ppm. It's just that the IPCC want the public to look at ice cores only which are which are not direct chemical tests. They are "proxy" tests.
CO2 cannot be trapped securely in ice. CO2 chemically dissolves and reacts with water and there are at least 20 different process in ice cores which consume CO2. Therefore CO2 measured in ice will more likely be lower that it is in the atmosphere.

Mans emissions went from 0.5 billion tonnes of CO2 in 1910 to 4 Billion tonnes in 1942 and the temp went up 0.5 of a degree.

Between 1942 and 1975 global emissions increased from 4 billion tonnes of CO2 per year in 1942 to over 20 billion tonnes of CO2 by 1975.

But temperatures dropped from 1942 to 1975 when global emissions increased by 16 billion tonnes of CO2 per year and based on the previous warming, this should have caused a 16C rise in temperatures but instead there was nothing but cooling.

That is the infromation readers here need to know.

Does anyone recall anyone in the Irish Times, Examiner or Independent giving you these figures?

Absolutely not.

Climate Change is the Greatest scientific scandal of our time.

[fiannafailure]

I used to respect your views Cactus.

"It's old news that there may be a decade of cooler temperatures". I think you should stop there.

We've already had a decade of cooling since 1998. And another 10 or 20 years of cooling to come will make it 30 years of cooling. And you think this is not a problem. How in God's name does that compute with runaway Global warming? How does that compute with our supposed highest CO2 levels since for 1000's of years?

It doesn't compute at all you see.

CO2 levels were higher in 1940 than they are today. One German Researcher (Kruetz) did 64,000 chemical tests of the atmosphere between 1939 and 1941 and CO2 levels were between 450 - 500 ppm (0.045 - 0.050 %). The maximum influence from industrial interference was estimated to range from 20ppm - 70ppm. It's just that the IPCC want the public to look at ice cores only which are which are not direct chemical tests. They are "proxy" tests.
CO2 cannot be trapped securely in ice. CO2 chemically dissolves and reacts with water and there are at least 20 different process in ice cores which consume CO2. Therefore CO2 measured in ice will more likely be lower that it is in the atmosphere.

Mans emissions went from 0.5 billion tonnes of CO2 in 1910 to 4 Billion tonnes in 1942 and the temp went up 0.5 of a degree.

Between 1942 and 1975 global emissions increased from 4 billion tonnes of CO2 per year in 1942 to over 20 billion tonnes of CO2 by 1975.

But temperatures dropped from 1942 to 1975 when global emissions increased by 16 billion tonnes of CO2 per year and based on the previous warming, this should have caused a 16C rise in temperatures but instead there was nothing but cooling.

That is the infromation readers here need to know.

Does anyone recall anyone in the Irish Times, Examiner or Independent giving you these figures?

Absolutely not.

Climate Change is the Greatest scientific scandal of our time.

So are you a waster or a saver

[Gnome Chomsky]

We've already had a decade of cooling since 1998.

NO.

1998 or 2005 was the warmest year on record (depending on source). You have fixed the result by starting with the warmest year. Global warming doesn't mean every year will be warmer then the last. It means the trend is for more warming. If you take the more appropriate measure, instead of individual years, you will see that this decade is (well on course to be) warmer than the last which itself was warmer than the last. How's that decade of cooling going now?

You're either being intentionally deceptive or you are laughably out of your depth.

[Ecoguy]

I think the recent record lows for Arctic summer sea ice extent in recent years, plus the continuing loss of mountain glaciers around the world is probably a better measure of where we are at in terms of global climate change

[Destiny's Soldier]

I'll go with Satellite data. Do you mind if I quote the IPCC guy who said we haven't had warming for a decade?

And for Fiannafailure .. a waster or a saver?

I, like most people do whatever I can to save money. I forked out €11,000 on a fairly exotic solar panel set up 2 years ago. It's probably more that anything the Green ministers have on their properties.Whether I'll get a return on investment remains to be seen.
I invested another €10K in a sewage treatment facility when a septic tank would have sufficed. In fact if you came to my house you would see expenditure in relation insulation that many properties would have. So I am a saver and a spender.

But if I have the money to buy a gas guzzler 4 x 4, good luck to me. I earned it, I pay enough in Tax to the state when I buy it and pay road tax and pay for diesel.
It's personal liberty and anyone who wants to interfere in my life issuing Carbon Credit rations -like what is being proposed in the UK - deserve to be told to F off.

[Geoffrey]

Guys, it is worse than we think. If we don't stop Catastrophic Climate Change there will be volcanoes and tsunamis. The time for Climate denial is over, denying Climate Change should be a criminal offense.

Climate Change: University College London Conference Warns Of Tsunamis And Eruptions | UK News | Sky News

During a three-day conference at University College London (UCL), scientists will show how alterations in the earth's crust could trigger unexpected events.

They say evidence from the past reveals that times of dramatic climatic change are characterised by heightened geological activity.

For example, 10,000 years ago, at the end of the last ice age, melting ice and rising sea levels triggered a significant rise in volcanic eruptions.

Professor Bill McGuire, Director of the Benfield Hazard Research Centre at UCL warned earth's future could be explosive.

He told Sky News Online: "Climate change is very doom and gloom I'm afraid and it's one of those problems that the closer we look at it the worse it seems to get.

"If you want some faint glint of good news from this I suppose that if we see a big volcanic response, the gases pumped into the atmosphere will cool things down at least temporarily, but that's not recommended.

"We need to be cutting emissions, not waiting for all the volcanoes on the planet to erupt."

SAVE THE PLANET.

[Destiny's Soldier]

I think the recent record lows for Arctic summer sea ice extent in recent years, plus the continuing loss of mountain glaciers around the world is probably a better measure of where we are at in terms of global climate change

http://www.politics.ie/environment/1...-disgrace.html

Record Arctic? You must be joking. See linked post.

Records that begain in the 70's only.

We know the Arctic has been ice free many times in the past 100 years and was hotter between 1920 - 1940.

I tired of warmers. Just a pathetic bunch of control freak do gooders who haven't a clue about science.

[Gnome Chomsky]

Hey Destiny's soldier. You seem to have missed my post at #24 because you haven't responded yet.

[dresden8]

Guys, it is worse than we think. If we don't stop Catastrophic Climate Change there will be volcanoes and tsunamis. The time for Climate denial is over, denying Climate Change should be a criminal offense.

Climate Change: University College London Conference Warns Of Tsunamis And Eruptions | UK News | Sky News







SAVE THE PLANET.

Nothing says FACT like Scary Pictures

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGH HHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!