Jump to content
The Corroboree
Evil Genius

The Great Global Warming/Cooling Thread Part 2

Recommended Posts

CLIMATE SILENCE....still trying to fathom that..do you make em up?

edit...is that like the climate being in denial.... :lol: I see there is a whole group belting out that tune....must be pretty silent as I hadn't even heard of them.

How about CLIMATE GULLIBLE...Thought they all died off in the 70's but I guess they had off spring :P :P

Edited by Dolos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your cartoons can't stop us now.. Anyway, just because we don't agree on some some aspects of CC, doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it.

Edited by Halcyon Daze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New science upsets calculations on sea level rise, climate change

Ice sheet melt massively overestimated, satellites show

A new analysis of data from dedicated satellites shows that one of the main factors predicted to drive rising sea levels in future has been seriously overestimated, with major implications for climate talks currently underway in Doha.

The new methods involve filtering out noise from the data produced by the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE) spacecraft, sent into orbit with the aim of finding out just how much ice is melting from the world's ice sheets and glaciers. Such water then runs off into the sea, providing one of the main potential drivers of sea level rise - which is itself perhaps the main reason to worry about climate change.

"GRACE data contain a lot of signals and a lot of noise. Our technique learns enough about the noise to effectively recover the signal, and at much finer spatial scales than was possible before," explains professor Frederik Simons of Princeton uni. "We can 'see through' the noise and recover the 'true' geophysical information contained in these data. We can now revisit GRACE data related to areas such as river basins and irrigation and soil moisture, not just ice sheets."

Simons and his colleague Christopher Harig tried their new methods out on GRACE data covering the Greenland ice sheet, which is of particular interest as the rest of the Arctic ice cap floats on the sea and so cannot contribute directly to sea level rise by melting. Meanwhile the Antarctic ice cap is actually getting bigger, so Greenland is probably the major worry.

According to a Princeton statement highlighting the new research:

While overall ice loss on Greenland consistently increased between 2003 and 2010, Harig and Simons found that it was in fact very patchy from region to region.

In addition, the enhanced detail of where and how much ice melted allowed the researchers to estimate that the annual acceleration in ice loss is much lower than previous research has suggested, roughly increasing by 8 billion tons every year. Previous estimates were as high as 30 billion tons more per year.

The rate of loss of ice from Greenland is estimated at 199.72 plus-or-minus 6.28 gigatonnes per year. So the possible acceleration of losses is only barely larger than the margin of error in the readings: it's very difficult to tell the supposed loss curve from a straight line.

In other words the possible acceleration in ice losses is barely perceptible: it may not really be happening at all. Similar results were seen not long ago in GRACE data for central Asian mountain glaciers, another suggested source for sea-level rises.

If the Greenland ice losses aren't accelerating, there's no real reason to worry about them. According to the Princeton statement:

At current melt rates, the Greenland ice sheet would take about 13,000 years to melt completely, which would result in a global sea-level rise of more than 21 feet (6.5 meters).

Put another way, in that scenario we would be looking at 5cm of sea level rise from Greenland by the year 2130: a paltry amount. Authoritative recent research drawing together all possible causes of sea level rise bears this out, suggesting maximum possible rise in the worst case by 2100 will be 30cm. More probably it will be less, and there will hardly be any difference between the 20th and 21st centuries in sea level terms.

http://www.theregist...climate_change/

You know...science.

Edited by Dolos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course to those in a cult climate change got real. In every cult in the world they percieve it to be real. It just don't make it so. Watch your perceptions evaperate over the coming years....Cults die out, new evils rise and the gullible jump on board. It's just....

HISTORY REPEATING...............

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your cartoons can't stop us now..

Go Go Gadget cartoon deflecter in place. wwwhhhoooaaahhh...(evil laugh)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That article completely misrepresents what the authors found and stated. Look at your dodgy sources mate...

Here's a better breakdown of Harig and Simons findings.

http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/greenland-losing-ice-121119.htm

"the take home message is that the small amount of increase detected in central Greenland is not remotely enough to offset the melting along the coasts, "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it was in the US elections hey? Like it isn't all around the world now. What planet do you live on? There must be a whole different reality playing in your head but 97% of us just don't see it. I'm still trying to fathom how climate change is becoming visible around us. Are you referring to summer by any chance? Is it the bush fires raging around us because idiots in the green movement have made the issuing of fire permits almost impossible to get mean 'global warming'? Could you really be that thick? Are you saying that you believe people will link this hot spell with global warming? Only those with a barrow to push would...I love the records broken nonsense. Who's records? Lucky Australia has only been around for a couple of hundred years.

What I said was I respect those who have fought so hard to end climate silence (over the decades).They have been picked on badly for years etc.

I was talking about the past couple decades and you go into a rant over what is happening in recent months.

The thing I've noticed about you Dolos is that you have to change/skew the argument in order to have something to attack. It's called setting up the 'Straw Man'. Most of your dodgy sources do exactly the same thing, they misrepresent the scientific findings to begin with and then go about tearing them down.

The problem is these things don't exist because no-one has made these arguments to begin with. I think you're delving more and more into the fantasy because you're running out of ammunition, just like your dodgy sources and cartoons. You guyz are creating an alternative reality for yourself :(

Anyway, look on the bright side. Fighting climate change is fun and rewarding. Never before has a generation of humans had the opportunity to SAVE THE ENTIRE PLANET! Come on what R U waiting for? Vindication?

You don't need that :)

peace

Edited by Halcyon Daze
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sea rise 'not linked to warming', says report

THE latest science on sea level rises has found no link to global warming and no increase in the rate of glacier melt over the past 100 years.

A paper published last month in Journal of Climate highlights one of the great uncertainties in climate change research - will ocean levels rise by more than the current 3mm a year?

The peer-reviewed article, "20th-century global-mean sea-level rise: is the whole greater than the sum of the parts?" by JM Gregory, sought to explain the factors involved in sea-level rises during the last century. It found that sea-level rises had not accelerated "despite the increasing anthropogenic forcing" or human influence.

Australia's pre-eminent sea-level scientist, John Church, contributed to the paper, which said it could not link climate change and the rate of sea-level rises in the 20th century.

Australia is at the forefront of global research on sea-level rises, but must double its funding to $10 million a year to match other countries in the search for an answer.

There is no dispute that sea levels are rising and significant concerns about what the recent increased rate of melt of Arctic ice might mean. But the key question is whether the rate of sea-level rise will accelerate and, if so, when and by how much?

Australian optical space tracking technology developed to help manage remotely operated weapons systems is playing a key role in a global satellite monitoring program.

Ben Greene, a doctor of theoretical physics, said Australia was already a world leader in measuring sea levels.

"We have the precisions with what we are doing to measure sea level rises averaged over a decade," he said. "What we need to know is what the acceleration is."

Dr Greene's company owns the technology that is used worldwide to help measure sea level rise. He has offered the company's facilities profit-free to encourage Australia to increase its research effort in line with other nations.

"We need to move from fear-based to fact-based evidence," Dr Greene said. "We can trust the current models for the next 10 years, but there are problems after 15 years; sea level rises could be better or they could be worse."

The University of Reading paper says contributions to sea level rises include expansion of the water itself as it warms, melting glaciers and ice sheets, groundwater extraction and water trapped in reservoirs.

"We show that it is possible to reconstruct the time series of global mean sea level rise (GMSLR) from the quantified contributions," the paper said.

"Semi-empirical methods for projecting global mean sea level rise depend on the existence of a relationship between global climate change and the rate of GMSLR, but the implication of our closure of the budget is that such a relationship is weak or absent during the 20th century," the paper said.

Dr Greene said overseas opinion was there would be a bit more sea level rise in the short term.

"The interesting thing comes in about 10 years' time if methane and CO2 traps in the ocean start to get released," he said.

"There would then be at least a short term acceleration some time in the 2020s. But the rise may accelerate and then reverse."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/sea-rise-not-linked-to-warming-says-report/story-e6frg8y6-1226553928313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science? You call the modeling behind this science? I think the oz is calling it fairly well....The IPCC and it's authors didn't know then and they don't know now. Do me a favor and tell me, based on current evidence, how far is the sea expected to rise in the next 100 years? Is the sea rising 4mm or 100 meters? Which one is it cause I can bring up that many conflicting reports. Didn't Flannery say it could be as high as 100 meters not that long ago? He owns a lovely water front property on the Hawesbury...Hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so your argument now is that the journalist knows more about the authors paper than the authors themselves?

060.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science? You call the modeling behind this science?

Can you explain just how modelling isn't science please?

The IPCC and it's authors didn't know then and they don't know now.

Don't know what?

Do me a favor and tell me, based on current evidence, how far is the sea expected to rise in the next 100 years? Is the sea rising 4mm or 100 meters? Which one is it cause I can bring up that many conflicting reports.

I think it's well established that there are uncertainties with the projections, the scientists have been very honest about that. They get lots of shit for being honest. There's a joke going around that goes something like this:

"The scientists tried to "Hide the Decline" - they are so dumb they published it in Nature where anyone can see what they've been up to!"

Anyway, I thought it was funny. This is what Wikipedia has to say.

"In 2007 the IPCC) projected that during the 21st century, sea level will rise another 18 to 59 cm but these numbers do not include "uncertainties in climate-carbon cycle feedbacks nor do they include the full effects of changes in ice sheet flow". More recent projections assessed by the US NRC (2010) suggest possible sea level rise over the 21st century of between 56 and 200 cm (22 and 79 in)."

Didn't Flannery say it could be as high as 100 meters not that long ago? He owns a lovely water front property on the Hawesbury...Hypocrite.

A bit like saying that lung cancer isn't real because you saw a dentist smoking once. It's a really odd conclusion to make, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ocean Heat Came Back to Haunt Australia

Posted on 15 January 2013 by Rob Painting

Over the last 50 years an enormous amount of energy, equivalent to two Hiroshima bombs per second, has gone into heating the global oceans. Because of their much greater mass, the oceans have a thermal capacity roughly one thousand times greater than the atmosphere. This means that despite this huge increase in accumulated energy, the change in upper ocean temperature is small compared to that of global surface air temperatures.

Upper ocean heat buried beneath the surface layers doesn't necessarily remain in the ocean though. For instance, the largest year-to-year fluctuation in global temperature generally occurs in response to the Pacific Ocean phenomenon called the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO). Variation in ocean circulation and surface winds typically expose warmer-than-average sea surface water to the atmosphere during El Niño, and cooler-than-average sea surface water during La Niña episodes (check out this brilliant animation to understand the fundamental process). The resultant ocean-to-atmosphere heat exchange has a major influence on global surface temperature in any given year, and this works to obscure the long-term surface global warming trend when viewed at short intervals.

Due to the huge difference in heat capacities between the ocean and atmosphere, what may in fact be a small amount of ocean heat transforms into a major bout of atmospheric warming when this heat is transferred from the ocean to atmosphere. A poignant example is the record-breaking heat wave which has recently enveloped all of Australia.

A heat wave requires a number of 'weather fluctuation stars to align', so-to-speak, but the role of the ocean in this heat wave is demonstrated in the animation below - where a pulse of oceanic heat rapidly accumulates in the surface Indian Ocean around Western Australia and propagates eastward.

NOAAsstanimation.gif

Figure 1 - Global sea surface temperature anomalies (departures from the average) for the period 17th December 2012 to 10th January 2013. The maps are from the US-based National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The temperature bar is in °C and the anomalies are relative to the long-term average at each location for that time of year.

The marine heat wave which contributed to this record-breaking Australian heat wave, may (hopefully) have been of short enough duration to prevent a mass mortality of marine life in the oceans around Australia, unlike a long-ish marine heat wave off Western Australia in early 2011, but that remains to be seen. Regardless, the vast accumulation of heat in the ocean going on right now may be "out of sight, out of mind" for many, but the extra heat being added to the upper levels of the ocean will have consequences for humanity, as this Australian heat wave amply demonstrates.

Like the giant European, Russian, and United States heat waves before this, the Australian heat wave will slowly fade in the collective memory of the public consciousness, but it may not be too long before another rears its head to inflict suffering. We have seen a historic increase in record-breaking temperatures globally (Hansen [2012]) and, due to the well-understood physically-based scientific foundation (weather fluctuations operating within a warmer background climate state), we have to expect more frequent and more intense heat waves in the future (although their proximate causes are likely to differ).

On our current trajectory, these extreme record-breaking summer temperatures are set to effectively become the norm by around mid 21st century (Anderson [2011]). If this occurs it will present a formidable challenge, not only to human society in the form of wildfires and such, but to human agriculture and the many natural ecosystems that afford us our current lifestyles and feed 7 billion people. It might prove useful for our global society to act in order to prevent this scenario from becoming reality, something not even attempted thus far. Our children and grandchildren might think it was very useful of us.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Ocean-Heat-Came-Back-to-Haunt-Australia.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazon showing signs of degradation due to climate change, Nasa warns

Rainforest area twice the size of California experiencing drought rate that is unprecedented in a century, study shows

Amazon-rainforest-shows-s-007.jpg
The megadrought in the Amazon rainforest during the summer of 2005 caused widespread damage and die-offs to trees, as depicted in this photo taken in western Amazonia in Brazil. Photograph: JPL-Caltech/Nasa

The US space agency Nasa warned this week that the Amazon rainforest may be showing the first signs of large-scale degradation due to climate change. A team of scientists led by the agency found that an area twice the size of California continues to suffer from a mega-drought that began eight years ago.

The new study shows the severe dry spell in 2005 caused far wider damage than previously estimated and its impact persisted longer than expected until an even harsher drought in 2010. With little time for the trees to recover between what the authors describe as a "double whammy", 70m hectares of forest have been severely affected, the analysis of 10 years of satellite microwave radar data revealed. The data showed a widespread change in the canopy due to the dieback of branches, especially among the older, larger trees that are most vulnerable because they provide the shelter for other vegetation.

"We had expected the forest canopy to bounce back after a year with a new flush of leaf growth, but the damage appeared to persist right up to the subsequent drought in 2010," said study co-author Yadvinder Malhi of Oxford University.

The Amazon is experiencing a drought rate that is unprecedented in a century, said the agency. Even before 2005, water availability had been shrinking steadily for more than 10 years, which made the trees more vulnerable. Between 2005 and 2010, localised dry spells added to the problem. The leader of the researc h team, Sassan Saatchi of Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said forests will find it increasingly difficult to recover if climate change makes droughts more frequent and severe.

"This may alter the structure and function of Amazonian rainforest ecosystems," he warned.

Nasa has been monitoring the Amazon for more than 40 years. Images it released last year showed the dramatic impacts of man-made deforestation over that period. Although the speed of forest clearance has slowed, the Amazon continues to shrink in area. The latest study suggests the quality as well as the quantity of forest is declining due to extreme climate conditions.

Amazon-forest-shows-degra-009.jpg

At left, the extent of the 2005 megadrought in the western Amazon rainforests during the summer months of June, July and August as measured by Nasa satellites. The most impacted areas are shown in shades of red and yellow. The circled area in the right panel shows the extent of the forests that experienced slow recovery from the 2005 drought, with areas in red and yellow shades experiencing the slowest recovery. Photograph: GSFC/JPL-Caltech/Nasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone actually enjoy the record-breaking heat in Sydney yesterday? I was out working in the city and the place was astonishingly quiet, eerily there was no-one walking around the centre even as early as 10am, and by 11 most of the traffic and usual sounds of machinery had all gone quiet. The heat was oppressive; the humidity so high I found it difficult to breathe, and had to go inside to recover by 11.30. My colleagues were called inside when it reached 38 degrees and 3 hours later it broke the existing record by 1/2 a degree.

The extreme heat over Australia is down to the fact that the monsoon season is unusually late this year. The monsoon brings cooler weather and rains to the far north, which helps to break up the trapped heat in the centre of the continent. The monsoon is over Indonesia, and we are still waiting for it to arrive!

Already, several maximum temperatures have been broken, with 7 of the highest 20 average maximum days ever recorded having occurred in the first days of this month. This is, I think, also the longest unbroken stretch of highest average maximums.

I guess this is what climate change really offers us, not just a small increase in average temperatures but largely unpredictable, extreme weather events that will be difficult not just for us to tolerate but also our natural ecosystems. Last year, rainfall was about average but it all happened in the first half of the year, then almost nothing. I imagine native vegetation will suffer more and more, suffering the impacts of a changing climate, further clearing, water extraction and incursions of weed species. We need a comprehensive plan to prevent further degradation of our life-support system, with a more integrated approach to regulation and protection of the environment.

This is occurring all over the planet, right now, and yet still our politicians haven't got a clue what's really going on. Shame on them, they campaign for the position of power and when they get there they refuse to act when needed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone actually enjoy the record-breaking heat in Sydney yesterday? I was out working in the city and the place was astonishingly quiet, eerily there was no-one walking around the centre even as early as 10am, and by 11 most of the traffic and usual sounds of machinery had all gone quiet. The heat was oppressive; the humidity so high I found it difficult to breathe, and had to go inside to recover by 11.30. My colleagues were called inside when it reached 38 degrees and 3 hours later it broke the existing record by 1/2 a degree.

The extreme heat over Australia is down to the fact that the monsoon season is unusually late this year. The monsoon brings cooler weather and rains to the far north, which helps to break up the trapped heat in the centre of the continent. The monsoon is over Indonesia, and we are still waiting for it to arrive!

Already, several maximum temperatures have been broken, with 7 of the highest 20 average maximum days ever recorded having occurred in the first days of this month. This is, I think, also the longest unbroken stretch of highest average maximums.

I guess this is what climate change really offers us, not just a small increase in average temperatures but largely unpredictable, extreme weather events that will be difficult not just for us to tolerate but also our natural ecosystems. Last year, rainfall was about average but it all happened in the first half of the year, then almost nothing. I imagine native vegetation will suffer more and more, suffering the impacts of a changing climate, further clearing, water extraction and incursions of weed species. We need a comprehensive plan to prevent further degradation of our life-support system, with a more integrated approach to regulation and protection of the environment.

This is occurring all over the planet, right now, and yet still our politicians haven't got a clue what's really going on. Shame on them, they campaign for the position of power and when they get there they refuse to act when needed.

All alarmist nonsense of course. Answer this for me. If we have just broken temperture records that has been reached before what was the cause of the record high temps last time? You confuse weather with climate again. Do you think Australia has never suffered a heat wave?

988265-130119-bill-leak-story.jpeg

Could you do me a favour and answer the question this time. Everytime I ask one or I ask you to provide proof of one of your outlandish claims you never do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go again Dolos :)

My friends in America recon they are having the craziest weather ever over the past few years. They say people are really starting to ask each other what they can do about climate change.

It's a shame we didn't have a little bit more faith in our brilliant scientists over the last few decades.

Edited by Halcyon Daze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teacher: 2 plus 2 equals 4

Student: Where is the evidence for that?

Teacher: Good question. 2 blocks here, plus 2 blocks there. Put them together, and what do you get?

Student: But how do you know?

Teacher: You can do that with any 2 groups of anything. Here look, there are 2 books, and over there, 2 more books. Bring them together, and what do you get?

Student: I don't believe you.

Teacher: Huh?

Student: One of the other students said you were lying. I believe him.

Teacher: All other teachers of basic maths say the same, the evidence is pretty obvious.

Student: I saw you with 3 blocks and 1 block the other day, you are such a hypocrite.

Teacher: What does that have to do with it?

Student: If you use 3 blocks, you can't believe 2 and 2 makes 4.

Teacher: Put 2 blocks with another 2 and you always get 4! Just because 3 and 1 make the same result, doesn't mean that one of them is false. The evidence is there, you just have to look at it.

Student: What evidence?

Teacher: I just showed you. Can we move on and discuss what to do with it?

Student: Where is your skepticism?

Teacher: Get out of my class, please.

Student: How dare you, you are so rude! I do not believe you and won't get out of the class!

Teacher: (Takes deep breath):

Where do we go from here? Dolos, if you refuse to believe the basic evidence, which is freely available for you to look at, then there can be nothing to discuss. Go and do some research first.

Better still, try to figure out how science actually works.

It's like having a discussion about evolution which gets permanently disrupted by creationists who refuse to bring any real evidence to the table, and refuse to accept basic science. It's incredibly frustrating and ultimately doesn't resolve anything. Or a cactus thread which gets spammed by someone who is only interested in algae. If you want to talk about algae, or creationism, or conspiracy theories, please go and start your own thread and see how far you get.

I respectfully suggest, Dolos, that you don't know what you are talking about, and never will, unless you accept basic science and move on from there. Until you do, nothing you say on this subject will make any sense whatsoever. This thread is discussing a real, observable, scientifically measurable phenomena, and what to do about it.

I'm sorry if you are offended by this, but you are creating serious problems with your inability to communicate at the same level as everyone else, and misunderstanding the basic premise of this thread. Seriously, I want to have a sensible, grown up discussion about climate change and what we should be doing about it and am very much over listening to crackpot theories and rhetoric from people who don't have a clue what they are talking about. You are sounding increasingly fanatical about your inherent inability to trust science, and I am trying to be polite when I suggest you do some work on at least attempting to find out where this discussion comes from instead of just spouting off.

I'm sorry about the use of analogies, I can see why you dislike them, but I'm trying to get through to you where I am coming from. I can't think of any other way of explaining to you just how insane you sound to me. You have become obsessed about something you know nothing about and refuse to accept that anyone else might be right, not even just a little bit. You asked me where the evidence is, after I showed you several data points. There isn't enough evidence there Dolos, I know that and have never claimed that it was. But this was just one small tiny piece of evidence in one of the largest studies based in science ever done by human beings, and you refuse to accept any of the results, with no explanation of why. I can't give you the evidence here Dolos, you know I can't, it's been compiled elsewhere and is massive, so massive I suspect you haven't even gone and had a look because it's just so overwhelming.

This is a serious problem on so many levels, where people can have belief systems which are based on very little evidence. It's in politics, it's in the economy, it's in law, it's in religion, it's everywhere. How can we get beyond this problem and start building a society based on calm logic and scientific understanding? How can science be built into our education system so we don't have people going off on weird tangents and potentially wrecking everything with their crazy ideas and inability to accept reality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I wish we could have compelling discussions about this most important issue of our time. Instead we have these ludicrous and frantic ravings that CC is all some big hoax. I don't believe in Chemtrails but I don't go on and on about it in the chemtrails threads.

You're a man on a mission Dolos, maybe the street corner is a better place for you to preach/push your believes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teacher: 2 plus 2 equals 4

Student: Where is the evidence for that?

Teacher: Good question. 2 blocks here, plus 2 blocks there. Put them together, and what do you get?

Student: But how do you know?

Teacher: You can do that with any 2 groups of anything. Here look, there are 2 books, and over there, 2 more books. Bring them together, and what do you get?

Student: I don't believe you.

Teacher: Huh?

Student: One of the other students said you were lying. I believe him.

Teacher: All other teachers of basic maths say the same, the evidence is pretty obvious.

Student: I saw you with 3 blocks and 1 block the other day, you are such a hypocrite.

Teacher: What does that have to do with it?

Student: If you use 3 blocks, you can't believe 2 and 2 makes 4.

Teacher: Put 2 blocks with another 2 and you always get 4! Just because 3 and 1 make the same result, doesn't mean that one of them is false. The evidence is there, you just have to look at it.

Student: What evidence?

Teacher: I just showed you. Can we move on and discuss what to do with it?

Student: Where is your skepticism?

Teacher: Get out of my class, please.

Student: How dare you, you are so rude! I do not believe you and won't get out of the class!

Teacher: (Takes deep breath):

Where do we go from here? Dolos, if you refuse to believe the basic evidence, which is freely available for you to look at, then there can be nothing to discuss. Go and do some research first.

Better still, try to figure out how science actually works.

It's like having a discussion about evolution which gets permanently disrupted by creationists who refuse to bring any real evidence to the table, and refuse to accept basic science. It's incredibly frustrating and ultimately doesn't resolve anything. Or a cactus thread which gets spammed by someone who is only interested in algae. If you want to talk about algae, or creationism, or conspiracy theories, please go and start your own thread and see how far you get.

I respectfully suggest, Dolos, that you don't know what you are talking about, and never will, unless you accept basic science and move on from there. Until you do, nothing you say on this subject will make any sense whatsoever. This thread is discussing a real, observable, scientifically measurable phenomena, and what to do about it.

I'm sorry if you are offended by this, but you are creating serious problems with your inability to communicate at the same level as everyone else, and misunderstanding the basic premise of this thread. Seriously, I want to have a sensible, grown up discussion about climate change and what we should be doing about it and am very much over listening to crackpot theories and rhetoric from people who don't have a clue what they are talking about. You are sounding increasingly fanatical about your inherent inability to trust science, and I am trying to be polite when I suggest you do some work on at least attempting to find out where this discussion comes from instead of just spouting off.

I'm sorry about the use of analogies, I can see why you dislike them, but I'm trying to get through to you where I am coming from. I can't think of any other way of explaining to you just how insane you sound to me. You have become obsessed about something you know nothing about and refuse to accept that anyone else might be right, not even just a little bit. You asked me where the evidence is, after I showed you several data points. There isn't enough evidence there Dolos, I know that and have never claimed that it was. But this was just one small tiny piece of evidence in one of the largest studies based in science ever done by human beings, and you refuse to accept any of the results, with no explanation of why. I can't give you the evidence here Dolos, you know I can't, it's been compiled elsewhere and is massive, so massive I suspect you haven't even gone and had a look because it's just so overwhelming.

This is a serious problem on so many levels, where people can have belief systems which are based on very little evidence. It's in politics, it's in the economy, it's in law, it's in religion, it's everywhere. How can we get beyond this problem and start building a society based on calm logic and scientific understanding? How can science be built into our education system so we don't have people going off on weird tangents and potentially wrecking everything with their crazy ideas and inability to accept reality?

That’s enough from you. What bloody childish dribble! And again...the question was what caused the heat waves of the past that caused these heat records to be set in the first place. YOU DON"T KNOW! YOU CAN"T ANSWER THAT! A simple question and it's a simple answer. It was 'weather'. Just as it always has been. Your childish analogies speak volumes in regards to your immature mentality. I am finished with you cause you have nothing to add to the debate other than parroting the alarmism of others and dishing insults. I for one would be embarrassed if I had spent all that time trying to answer a simple question like I asked and to have responded with that nonsense. Very childlike. You and I am finished here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gone all together waterboy...just no longer wasting time with those with nothing sensable to add to the conversation...much like your post really...you know...juvenile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×