It's Bloody Cold Here - Is Global Warming All Over?

FantomX

Linton wrote: »

You are wasting your time. The denyers dont need years of study, a detailed understanding of the complex mechanisms involved, or access to massive amounts of data collected from all over the world over many decades. They are in the fortunate position of just knowing the truth without being encumbred with such unnecessary baggage.

Anyone spot the typical attack here? If you don't agree with Climate Change or whatever then you are a denier?

And lets not forget the masses of data that this knob refers too...i.e. data that has been manipulated and has never been released for peer review? Also, what of the CRU and the now descredited hockey stick graph? Even Al Gore has now distanced himself from the like of Linton!

The Climate Change phrase of the 21st Century: "hide the decline"

:rotfl: :T

FantomX

andykn wrote: »

I've already explained how that's not true here:


The only scam going on here is you trying to pretend that the rise in atmospheric CO2 since 1870, amounting to about half man's production in that time is not due to man but some "mystery" source and that man's CO2 is magically disappearing at the same time.

One record from one single point on the planet is interesting but not as reliable as multi proxy reconstructions. That's very elementary science.

No the only scam going on is the Global Cooling...erm I mean...Global Warming...err no hang on...err...ah yes, Climate Change scam! The fact that the scam continues to alter it's name just goes to show that it is indeed a huge SCAM!

Communism failed, socialism failed and now environmentalism has failed! All that is left now is complete mentalism!

And does anyone notice how people seem to label those that disagree as "deniers" and imply that such people that don't believe thier bullsh1t are in the same league as Holocaust Deniers?

These people are dangerous and they are becoming more and more dangerous as thier funding dries up. The CRU being exposed nearly did the trick...all we need is another leak and I'm hopeful that wikileaks will indeed put the final nail in the coffin on what is an attempt to abolish democracy and replace it with green communism.

:money:

Linton

FantomX wrote: »

And lets not forget the masses of data that this knob refers too...i.e. data that has been manipulated and has never been released for peer review? Also, what of the CRU and the now descredited hockey stick graph?

Millions of data points, thousands of people all over the world. Hundreds of research teams. Tens? of separate computer models. And its all a vast conspiratorial lie intended to sap the vital juices of the worlds population.

Thank god for FantomX and friends, they werent fooled, they knew the answers, they could see the truth. None of this nonsense of actually understanding complex science. What about reading scientific papers and being able to dicuss the theories from a position of knowledge? Not necessary - all one needs is "s'obvious innit".

Personally I used to think the jury's out on the matter, the more I hear from the anti's the weaker their case seems.

FantomX

Linton wrote: »

Millions of data points, thousands of people all over the world. Hundreds of research teams. Tens? of separate computer models. And its all a vast conspiratorial lie intended to sap the vital juices of the worlds population.

Thank god for FantomX and friends, they werent fooled, they knew the answers, they could see the truth. None of this nonsense of actually understanding complex science. What about reading scientific papers and being able to dicuss the theories from a position of knowledge? Not necessary - all one needs is "s'obvious innit".

Personally I used to think the jury's out on the matter, the more I hear from the anti's the weaker their case seems.

Yes they all have a common goal: FUNDING!

And don't forget, a computer only does what the computer model program tells it to do! Time and time a gain computer models get it wrong and even now they still cannot even correctly predict next weeks weather! So on that basis, why the fook should ANYONE believe data that they produce?

ILW

So what exactly are the dire consequences if it is all true. I seem to remember being told we would have Med temperatures in the south of England by now and be growing grapes and all getting malaria. What went wrong?

ILW

andykn wrote: »

The thing is, Dr Phil Jones, Michael Mann and the rest all had jobs long before this was an issue and would all keep their jobs if the perfect CO2 absorption machine were discovered tomorrow.

Only their lives would be immeasurably easier without TV Weather presenters thinking that's the same as being a climate scientist and fooling ill educated members of the public with fake graphs.

Were these the guys that instructed their staff to ignore any data that went against their theory and not include it in any of the models?

FantomX

ILW, yes those were the guys. And what I find even more strange is that Phil Jones is back at the CRU as director. The guy was totally discredited yet they put him back in charge of the CRU again?

ILW

FantomX wrote: »

ILW, yes those were the guys. And what I find even more strange is that Phil Jones is back at the CRU as director. The guy was totally discredited yet they put him back in charge of the CRU again?

Do any of the supporters have any comment on that?

Linton

FantomX wrote: »

Yes they all have a common goal: FUNDING!

And don't forget, a computer only does what the computer model program tells it to do! Time and time a gain computer models get it wrong and even now they still cannot even correctly predict next weeks weather! So on that basis, why the fook should ANYONE believe data that they produce?

Oh dear, you clearly have never programmed a computer in your life.

Actually the next 5 days weather forecast is in my experience pretty accurate - try looking on the met office website. I suggest you read a primer on "chaos theory" and the work of Mandelbrot if you want to understand some of the issues involved in weather forecasting (which is not the same as climate forecasting). You should be able to find something in the popular science section of your local Waterstones.

Anyway - a challenge. Why dont you and your friends devise a climate prediction program that events will show is better at predicting the long term future than those which currently exist? That would be a far more convincing argument than silly personal attacks.

It shouldnt be too difficult. You have hundreds of brilliant "independent" researchers available worldwide. There must be funding available from the rightwing fundamentalists in the US. And the easiest part is that you will be able to base your program purely on real science rather than having to additionally manipulate the software to come up with the answers you wanted in the first place.

ILW

Linton wrote: »

Oh dear, you clearly have never programmed a computer in your life.

Actually the next 5 days weather forecast is in my experience pretty accurate - try looking on the met office website. I suggest you read a primer on "chaos theory" and the work of Mandelbrot if you want to understand some of the issues involved in weather forecasting (which is not the same as climate forecasting). You should be able to find something in the popular science section of your local Waterstones.

Anyway - a challenge. Why dont you and your friends devise a climate prediction program that events will show is better at predicting the long term future than those which currently exist? That would be a far more convincing argument than silly personal attacks.

It shouldnt be too difficult. You have hundreds of brilliant "independent" researchers available worldwide. There must be funding available from the rightwing fundamentalists in the US. And the easiest part is that you will be able to base your program purely on real science rather than having to additionally manipulate the software to come up with the answers you wanted in the first place.

Would that be the personal attacks regarding manipulating the data?