So a historian then? Sounds as little qualified as myself to have an opinion, given your God like status as a scientist. How kind of you to spare your precious time visiting us mere mortals.
I`m quite capable of reading complex technical papers....like a lot of people here who are technically literate. Many of those papers are accessible in libraries bookshops and, perish the thought, online too. I don`t think the book to which you refer is anything special....but I`ll keep an eye out for it.
Though obviously polemic in its approach CO2sceptics Home Page has sufficiently technically challenging content even for you.
I'm firmly convinced that "Climate change" as opposed to
"Global Warming" is just a natural cycle dependant on solar
activity phases.
There have been various warming phases and Mini Ice Ages
that have been reliably documented over the past centuries,
but, of course, they NEVER presented a Global opportunity
to MAKE the population pay through the nose to get Pseudos
to study them.
Relax folks, pay up and enjoy watching the proceedings.
Wonder what they'll come up with next to screw us all?
OFSO, you got figures? That's interesting in a way. Solar constant comes to mind. If there is any reasonable degree of correlation, we're talking a whole new ball park.
[/serious mode off]
Also an excellent excuse for a manned mision to Mars, to stop all this MMW (Martianogenic Martian Warming).
Humm, wait a second ... we're talking about little green men here, 'green' being the operative word.... Oops.
[/serious mode on]
Somewhere on Mars there is a stuffy, out of work politician who has made a lucrative second career of scaremongering. If they don't have one of these politicians, I'd be happy to nominate one for the next mission. One way ticket only.
A long life also allowed Global Surveyor to track changes through repeated annual cycles. For three Martian summers in a row, deposits of carbon-dioxide ice near Mars' South Pole shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.
A long life also allowed Global Surveyor to track changes through repeated annual cycles. For three Martian summers in a row, deposits of carbon-dioxide ice near Mars' South Pole shrunk from the previous year's size, suggesting a climate change in progress.
Three years in a row has of course nothing to do with "climate", it's just a trend worth watching.
Sadly the same confusing between "weather" and "climate" is happening here on Earth.
div#related-article-links p a, div#related-article-links p a:visited {color:#06c;}Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap, writes Jonathan Leake. Scientists from Nasa say that Mars has warmed by about 0.5C since the 1970s. This is similar to the warming experienced on Earth over approximately the same period. Since there is no known life on Mars it suggests rapid changes in planetary climates could be natural phenomena. The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth. One of the researchers, Lori Fenton, believes variations in radiation and temperature across the surface of the Red Planet are generating strong winds.
There are some strong elements and some powerful writing here. Did you know that climate change could "hit" a Mars ? Ftang ftang ! And that sneaky cop-out: no "known" life. So maybe some "unknown life" ? And "similar" and "approximately" in the same sentence....So pretty definite, it must be true.
Serious Mode Off, tinfoil-lined hat on, and back to Roswell.
Didn't climate change used to be called " Summer and Winter " something like colder in winter then getting warmer in summer?, and it always varied from year to year. Mind you, then we did not have vast amounts of people receiving vast amounts of money to tell us that, we noticed for ourselves and didn't blame each other.
I know. It's an actual book that will take longer than ten minutes to read
Whenever I see a post on this thread that starts with the 'I'm a published scientist' aka the I think I'm cleverer than you angle, I tend to think of another tired old academic who feels they've never received the recognition or reward for their 'scientific potential' that they feel they rightfully deserve and when they come across JetBlast they feel they can massage that frustration in the mistaken belief that their audience are a bunch of educated but nevertheless moronic crowd who'll be impressed with someone who calls themselves a 'scientist' simply because they feel the ability to form an opinion is somehow intellectually unique to them.
Anonymous global warming threads on the internet (as well as the minds of until now deeply pocketed politicians) are no doubt a happy hunting ground for such 'minds' as they can wallow in the comfort of untestable hypothesis whilst pretending to themselves they're actually part of a real scientific community. Without that detail of hypothesis testing, any contention to their adopted 'cause' can therefore be safely dismissed as layman ignorance which in turn reinforces the 'reality' of their self-alluded brilliance all along.
There are already too many global warmers who feel they can get away with professing the earth is flat simply because there are many others like them and they can hide in the herd. It is their job to convince us the Earth is flat but they're simply not succeeding.
Alternatively, the I'm a publicised scientist approach is really just an admission that the (about to be avoided) rationale for my view is weak and therefore you should listen to my (self-proclaimed) superior opinion rather than get bogged down in the nonsense of why it is justified...
Fernwood Green Burials
Fernwood Cemetery in Mill Valley Natural and Conventional Burials
An ad I was served up with this page.
Sorry guys, I expect to be around another twenty years so I still have an interest in what the weather/climate is going to do to ME, before crawling six foot under.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArthurR
Didn't climate change used to be called " Summer and Winter " something like colder in winter then getting warmer in summer?, and it always varied from year to year.
You're confusing weather and climate....
Hey, could any of your scientists define climate?
We have something here what I could describe as an observable local micro-climate....
Sun and high wind when the rest of France is in the sh*t. "Stuff" blowing in from the Med when the rest of France is doing OK. Snow one day a year only, literally, even this year when the rest of France was covered in the stuff, solidly. For anybody who can watch French met forecasts, it's that half-moon shape on the Golfe du Lion.
Climate? Maybe not quite yet, but it's pretty predictable over the thirteen years we've been here. Even if this year was somewhat cold and cruddy.
Predictable? Yes, same way I knew I was going to go slip-sliding through the snow in the Cotswold every year going to work, when we lived there in the early seventies.
"Climate"? First define it.
"Climate change"? Then define that, locally AND globally.
I'm not even asking about AGW, I leave that to the pox.
Well the history book is good reading if you're already convinced that AGW is for real, but the book does little to explain how the methodology of the "science" behind it holds up to scrutiny.
Nor does it say much about the anomaly in the ice cores that indicate that the temperature rise preceded the CO2 increase.
Nor does it explain how rigorous the temperature measurements were that it used as a basis for the proof of the hypothesis that temperature rises are directly linked to man-made CO2 emmissions. (Not very, as it turns out).
Like many "religous" tomes, it serves to keep the choir warm.
The reason I posted the DHMO article was to show how "facts" if they're presented in a "scientific obfuscation" format can prove anything.
None of those points can really be disputed and yet without the proper perspective and understanding could easily (as almost happened in the US) lead to a program to ban water.
Terry Dunleavy & John McLean -Of 62 reviewers of the crucial Chapter 9 of IPCC 4AR (attribution of cause of climate change), 55 were conflicted; of the remaining 7 apparently independent persons, only ONE explicitly endorsed the most important statement about human attribution in the chapter.
Lawrence Solomon - Environmentalists in the third-world are not buying the carbon offsets mechanisms set up to serve the Kyoto Protocol, and are organizing into strong local groups to fight to maintain their property rights.
Arthur Robinson – Western countries are committing technological genocide - and again especially against third-world countries - by planning carbon dioxide tax and trade measures to increase greatly the cost of provision of basic electricity supplies.
Tom McClintock – When politicians feel the heat, they see the light.
Linear Mode
