More on 'Climate Change'

[Lews]

Western Europe will get colder because of global warming due to a changing in ocean currents and all that jolly stuff.

I can't take seriously people who say global warming isn't true because it's cold where they are. People need to look into the science before they start making claims they know nothing about.

[Terrordar]

Dec 23, 2009 11:07:07 GMT Lews said:

Western Europe will get colder because of global warming due to a changing in ocean currents and all that jolly stuff.

I can't take seriously people who say global warming isn't true because it's cold where they are. People need to look into the science before they start making claims they know nothing about.

Agreed.

[Dark Phoenix Rising]

I was under the impression that it would become colder in the winters and warmer in the summers - for the same reason.

[Elliot Kane]

And even more climate change misinformation.

This time involving the UN and even the New Scientist which I always thought was above such things.

Yet more evidence that this is not science at all, but pure pseudo-religion.

[Elliot Kane]

And yet MORE misinformation!

I'd say I was surprised, but you'd all know I'm not...

[Terrordar]

"k x wrote:
Maps Onburt - comparisons need to be in the same units. You can't compare solar intensity (watts per square meter) to CO2 levels (parts per million). You have to compare the energy exchange processes. CO2 in the atmosphere has increased from a preindustrial level about about 270 ppm to a current level of about 385 ppm. (Rumours aside, it's clear that human activity is responsible for the bulk of that increase.)

So, you're arguing that increasing incoming radiation by 0.1% will have a greater effect than decreasing outgoing radiation by 42%. That seems unlikely to me, even considering that this oversimplified comparison doesn't account for the differences in spectral composition of radiation emitted by Earth and by the sun."

Sorry Elliot, I can't say I entirely agree with the position of your links.

[Elliot Kane]

The main (And by far most important) part of the links - at least IMO - is how the flimsiest evidence is seized upon by the climate change lobby and then quoted thereafter as incontrovertible fact, Terror.

When even the authors of the reports are saying their data is being interpreted in a way they had not intended, surely something smells a bit fishy...

[Elliot Kane]

A bit of law breaking, too, allegedly.

[Elliot Kane]

Possible corruption scandal AND more errors.

It's remarkable quite how unscientific some of these 'scientists' appear to be...

[ss]

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100213/ap_on_re_us/us_united_states_of_snow

[Terrordar]

ss. Once again, localized climate cooling is NOT a sign of Global Warming not being real. This has been explained to you before.

[ss]

Feb 14, 2010 6:57:35 GMT Terrordar said:

ss. Once again, localized climate cooling is NOT a sign of Global Warming not being real. This has been explained to you before.

I didn't say (or imply) that it was TD, was just posting the fact that we had snow in all 49 contentinal states....

Seeing as you are from Canada, I KNOW that the melting and warm that is in Vancouver att is not related to climate change.

Didn't see anywhere else to make the post......OK..??

PS....I DO believe that climate change is mostly hype to get money for the study of it...always did....

[Elliot Kane]

Given the faulty science and outright 'mistakes' that seems to underpin the entire Climate Change industry right now, is anything conclusive proof of anything else?

Fact is, we have nothing right now that seems to be backed up by genuine science rather than smoke and mirrors.

As such, Terror, your point is kinda redundant...

[Ubereil]

That some of the science is faulty doesn't mean it's all bogus, Elliot. The vast majority of the science is still correct.

I'd at least wait until the dust settles before making any judgements on this.

Übereil

[Elliot Kane]

Not saying it's all bogus either, Ube. Just that we haven't got the faintest clue what's true or not with any of it, right now. Far too much has been hidden or manipulated or just plain lied about for any of it to be taken at face value, though.

[Glance A'Lot]

One of the fundamental problems in any research field is the acquisition of funding. And that is more and more a function of 'return of investments' considerations.

As such it would require a basic change in attitude - fundamental research, which certainly would be required in the climate field to get a sound basis for discussion, doesn't 'pay back'. Hence people 'trick' to obtain any funding or to justify why they research there at all.

While public funding, which in many countries is on the decline, often covers that - the necessary private funding emphasizes application orientation.

It is unfortunate that the worth of knowledge gained from basic research is not valued more than that from applied sciences. A problem German universities, among others, have often encountered - fundamental knowledge has been acquired, but somebody else abroad has gotten all the patents for products developped on that basis.

[Elliot Kane]

It's also been the death of philosophy as a discipline, Glance. Unless you can put a price tag on something, it is too often deemed to be worthless. An Aristotle would never get funding today.

[ss]

Still more

news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100307/sc_mcclatchy/3444187