Climate Change Arguing

[HairyO]

Didn't the alarmists try that with Al Gore?

Im sure everything mentioned in his movie has come true.

Afterall he won so many awards and made billions of dollars.

 

[Crankitup]

No, the evidence is in the two most recent decades being the warmest on record and getting warmer. There’s graphs and everything. The fact you can actually see the evidence in action is just gravy.

Let's see them then. There was a pause in the warming remember. How much of any warming is due to UHI do you think? You can compare individual temperature stations which have UHI influences with their nearest neighbour without UHI influence and you see marked differences. I did so at post #325. There's countless other examples I can post where one station shows a pronounced warming trend and the other is trending flat.

 

[HairyO]

Oh so it doesnt matter in the big picture if the earth warms 1c or 3c?

Just a meaningless detail?

Like sea levels (maybe) rising while islands are actually growing.

We should just hand out the billions they are demanding. And when we run out we just print more.

 

[Crankitup]

They generally don't individually or collectively reduce the problem?

So if everyone that believes in AGW (the majority of the world's population, we are led to believe) sold their cars and rode a bike everywhere that wouldn't make a difference to CO2 emissions?? What about if they acted in other ways that aligned with their fear that we're heading for climate catastrophe like lining their rooves with solar panels etc?

 

[QuietB]

We should just hand out the billions they are demanding. And when we run out we just print more.

Why are you bringing up defence spending?

 

[HairyO]

Why are you bringing up defence spending?

We get value when we build it ourselves. Except for every single time ever.

At least they look good flying over the MCG and Grand Prix.

I dont even know where Tuvalu is. Near Fiji I think.

 

[QuietB]

So if everyone that believes in AGW (the majority of the world's population, we are led to believe) sold their cars and rode a bike everywhere that wouldn't make a difference to CO2 emissions?? What about if they acted in other ways that aligned with their fear that we're heading for climate catastrophe like lining their rooves with solar panels etc?

While we are talking about what if’s, what if you are wrong?

 

[Crankitup]

While we are talking about what if’s, what if you are wrong?

I can't technically be wrong because as I've said elsewhere in this thread I'm agnostic on the issue. I'm open to being convinced. Less open than I was 10 years ago mind you. So playing the devil's advocate, if I'm 'wrong', then they'll be able to grow grapes in Yorkshire again like they were able to just over a thousand years ago during the medieval warm period.

Ask yourself this, if Obama, who bleated on about the dangers of Climate Change more than any of his predecessors, can buy an oceanfront mansion not long after retiring, how likely is it that he believes in the hyperbole he helped perpetuate on the issue? I'm not in any way suggesting he bleated on about climate change in order that he would benefit from relatively stagnant oceanfront property prices BTW.

 

[QuietB]

I can't technically be wrong because as I've said elsewhere in this thread I'm agnostic on the issue. I'm open to being convinced. Less open than I was 10 years ago mind you. So playing the devil's advocate, if I'm 'wrong', then they'll be able to grow grapes in Yorkshire again like they were able to just over a thousand years ago during the medieval warm period.

Ask yourself this, if Obama, who bleated on about the dangers of Climate Change more than any of his predecessors, can buy an oceanfront mansion not long after retiring, how likely is it that he believes in the hyperbole he helped perpetuate on the issue? I'm not in any way suggesting he bleated on about climate change in order that he would benefit from relatively stagnant oceanfront property prices BTW.

The list of irrelevant reasons to do nothing really is endless for you guys isn't it

 

[Crankitup]

I reckon you've spent 50% of your effort in this post so far on semantics and etiquette. Not sure why it hasn't sunk in yet, but I don't care and I'm not apologizing for whatever grievance you think you have. You can keep posting about it all you like, it's not for me to decide what I'm being "exposed" as, that's for the rest of the forum to decide.

So you still pretend as though you did nothing wrong. If you keep this pretense up I'll recap it all line by line so no one can be confused about your mispresentation and lying as well as your refusals to apologise for doing so or even acknowledge you did so. Your silence on this matter from this point will also be telling.

How am I to know the person is actually a climate scientist.....

If you've never heard of Professor Tim Ball then I'm wasting my time with you.

 

[Crankitup]

The list of irrelevant reasons to do nothing really is endless for you guys isn't it

Not as long as the list of more worthwhile causes the billions that have been spent so far world wide and the trillions that will be spent, could benefit from.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

What do detention camps have to do with climate change?

Other poster raised the issue of traumatised children, not me.

“People are free to leave detention camps whenever they want.”

Yeeah, probably the most disingenuous statement ever.

Anyway, topic for another thread.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

David Attenborough knows nothing about man made climate change.

You, of course, on the other hand...

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Im sure everything mentioned in his movie has come true.

Afterall he won so many awards and made billions of dollars.

"Billions"? Are you quite sure?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

We get value when we build it ourselves. Except for every single time ever.

At least they look good flying over the MCG and Grand Prix.

I dont even know where Tuvalu is. Near Fiji I think.

Whoosh!

 

[Sainteric]

So if everyone that believes in AGW (the majority of the world's population, we are led to believe) sold their cars and rode a bike everywhere that wouldn't make a difference to CO2 emissions?? What about if they acted in other ways that aligned with their fear that we're heading for climate catastrophe like lining their rooves with solar panels etc?

Lining your roof with solar panels does nothing if you have coal fired generators.

Firstly none of it matters if China does not reduce its emissions today, we and most of the rest of the workd can live in caves and emissions will still be going up.

All fossil fuel generators have to go. Nuclear and Hydro to take their place, internal combustion goes in the next 5 odd years, maybe in the short term all cars to be reduced 1600 cc engines all major roads tolled and the city congestion charge. No more sheep and cows, back to sailing ships

 

[QuietB]

Not as long as the list of more worthwhile causes the billions that have been spent so far world wide and the trillions that will be spent, could benefit from.

So lets add up all the money spent on the environment and climate change and compare that to all the money spent on weapons and keeping brown people out.

I am willing to bet any amount you care to mention that the environment will lose badly. Like by a factor of 100.

 

[HairyO]

"Billions"? Are you quite sure?

Personal net worth went from a couple of million to hundreds of millions, his companies have made billions.

 

[Seeds]

A consensus that is peer reviewed isn’t fact.

It is all about keeping the plebs scared and relying on government to save us and keep us safe. This is also more effective if we’re divided. Together we stand and divided we fall.

How do you determine a fact?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Personal net worth went from a couple of million to hundreds of millions, his companies have made billions.

From one bloody documentary? Bullschite.

If Al Gore made hundreds of millions from a doco, Spielberg makes trillions from each of his blockbuster hits.

Climate deniers gullible? Nah.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

A consensus that is peer reviewed isn’t fact.

It is all about keeping the plebs scared and relying on government to save us and keep us safe. This is also more effective if we’re divided. Together we stand and divided we fall.

That's because there is no such thing as a "peer reviewed consensus".

 

[HairyO]

From one bloody documentary? Bullschite.

If Al Gore made hundreds of millions from a doco, Spielberg makes trillions from each of his blockbuster hits.

Climate deniers gullible? Nah.

Did I say it was just the movie?

The movie, the scare campaign and the masses of government money directed his way.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

So you still pretend as though you did nothing wrong. If you keep this pretense up I'll recap it all line by line so no one can be confused about your mispresentation and lying as well as your refusals to apologise for doing so or even acknowledge you did so. Your silence on this matter from this point will also be telling.

LOL

LOL

LOL

My silence will be telling?

Far out.

You've been silent on the science behind your arguments as soon as you encountered something your blogs didn't prepare your answer for. So far in the last two days you've avoided providing any real scientific evidence to support your arguments to the point where you're deliberately excluding parts of my post from your quotes that you don't have any answer to. Yes, that's right! It IS noticeable!

You ignored my request to point out specific parts of the highly detailed ESRL report which you think were incorrect. You ignored my request to provide any supporting evidence that the eruptions of Mt Erebus have been ignored, whether by accident or deliberately, by research bodies which you refuse to specify. You've posted a single, topical, factual research paper during your entire time in this thread and when you were challenged due to it's relevancy, you've again ignored my request for clarification.

And my silence is what's telling?

Every single time you've encountered a point to which you had no answer to in this thread, you've simply pretended it doesn't exist. The only thing you've argued consistently over the last week is this petulant sooking about my supposed "lies" and nasty "misrepresentations" which anybody with a ******* brain can tell is a pathetic cover for your arguments running out of depth way quicker than you intended.

You're an absolute laughing stock, my man.

If you've never heard of Professor Tim Ball then I'm wasting my time with you.

"If you've never heard of a prominent climate change denialist then I'm wasting my time with you as I exclusively deal with people who share my contrived beliefs"

Yeah nice, you got one of this research papers on ozone depletion handy like I asked? Are you going to ignore this request as well? Hope I'm not misrepresenting you again!

 

[kranky al]

Can you point to models peer reviewed in the 1980s and 1990s which have proven to be correct? Note that it requires the increase in CO2 matching the increase in temperatures.

How much peer review still goes on? The other day I was reading a complaint by an Australian scientist who was saying that there is only ever research money for new research. There is no research money for peer reviews anymore, so fewer scientists bother. Instead we get an ever increasing amount of new research which is not being properly tested.

This was across all fields of science, not just climate.

Well colour me surprised - a government that has cut the guts out of scientific funding results in less peer review.

Its....almost like....they wanted that ... to happen

 

[Crankitup]

You ignored my request to point out specific parts of the highly detailed ESRL report which you think were incorrect. .....

Oh the irony. You’ve ignored questions I’ve posed you in this thread and until now I’ve not even mentioned it. The fact is I answer you usually within a few hours of your posts to me. You respond sometimes days later. It hasn’t been days since you requested those other things and I fully intend to address this and the other points but the sticking point at the moment is the dishonest way you are dealing with me. You have misrepresented my position and lied about what I have and haven’t said at least three times in this thread so far. If you aren’t going to deal honestly I’m not going to waste any more time on you at all. I suspect this is what you wanted all along. Don't twist my words or misrepresent what I've said or GAGF. Agreed?

"If you've never heard of a prominent climate change denialist then I'm wasting my time with you as I exclusively deal with people who share my contrived beliefs".

Another misrepresentation. BTW it’s a bit rich to come across as someone prepared to refute what you see as denialist concepts if you refuse to read them.

Hope I'm not misrepresenting you again!

Your hope was in vain.