Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

[demondavey]

WTF?

You linked a Wordpress blog with no author referenced from a site 'And then there's Physics', which in turn references the Media Watch program.

So what cr@p are you dishing up?

WTF?

You linked a Wordpress blog with no author referenced from a site 'And then there's Physics', which in turn references the Media Watch program.

So what cr@p are you dishing up?

Nice try mate. It doesn’t ‘reference’ it. The link is ‘embedded’ in it. A search re John McLean provided with a variety of links, some were garbage, some I looked through. Word Press wasn’t a search, it happened to provide me with the clip I found poignant to the topic.

That’s the best you’ve got? Seriously?

 

[Fadge]

Nice try mate. It doesn’t ‘reference’ it. The link is ‘embedded’ in it. A search re John McLean provided with a variety of links, some were garbage, some I looked through. Word Press wasn’t a search, it happened to provide me with the clip I found poignant to the topic.

That’s the best you’ve got? Seriously?

You posted a blog from an unnamed author that references the Media Watch program by embedding it.

Don't waste our time.

 

[demondavey]

You posted a blog from an unnamed author that references the media blog article by embedding it.

Don't waste our time.

So the media watch program isn’t relevant due to the contents of the blog?

Right.

Seriously, you’ve added nothing. You’re a zero in all of this. I have yet to see you engage in a debate with me, you claim you’ve added to it already, so what? You don’t want to actually talk about the topic yet you’d rather just talk the most irrelevant minuscule details because you have no ability to discuss the topic?

If you’ve said your piece years ago then why are you even here? The only reason is to just derail the conversation. Seriously mate, take a long walk off a short pier.

 

[Total Power]

Sure, it's where most of the heating is taking place. There is very little happening at the equator.

Both northern and southern hemisphere temperatures are up. Are you the one who posted the Melbourne temps? Australian temps are on the rise for a few decades now. You playing cricket at 37 degrees in Melbourne means absolutely nothing.

 

[Ron The Bear]

That’s bullshit mate, you know it.

No, you need to start taking what I post at face value. I feel the cold more. If nobody kept count and you asked me, I'd have guessed it's colder than it was 30 years ago.

 

[Ron The Bear]

John McLean has made a career of comprehensive blunders. All you’ve done is produce to me one of the very small percentage of scientists who have got it wrong and are universally despised by their colleagues.

I'm not going to put up with this much longer. Do yolu want to discuss the actual points raised or not? McLean iidentified a plethora of egregious errors in the data which were accpeted by the Met Office.

 

[Fadge]

No, you need to start taking what I post at face value. I feel the cold more. If nobody homogonised the data and you asked me, I'd have guessed it's colder than it was 30 years ago.

EFA

 

[Fadge]

I'm not going to put up with this much longer. Do yolu want to discuss the actual points raised or not? McLean iidentified a plethora of egregious errors in the data which were accpeted by the Met Office.

Make sure you read the anonymous blog he posted before you engage with him...

 

[Ron The Bear]

Both northern and southern hemisphere temperatures are up. Are you the one who posted the Melbourne temps? Australian temps are on the rise for a few decades now. You playing cricket at 37 degrees in Melbourne means absolutely nothing.

Again you want to discuss points not raised. Yes I posted the Melbourne temperatures. Do you want to discuss Melbourne's climate or not?

And I commented on the lack of equatorial heating, which you ignored and then tried to make a point on hemispheres.

If you lot are going to quote posts, discuss the post and stop throwing out red herrings. Yes, I know you believe we are in the midst of a climate emergency.

Focus!

 

[Ron The Bear]

Make sure you read the anonymous blog he posted before you engage with him...

I didn't look. If McLean was a kook then his research would've been knocked back. He is not disputing global warming; the newspaper raised the prospect of climate models being unduly influenced by errors.

 

[Total Power]

Again you want to discuss points not raised. Yes I posted the Melbourne temperatures. Do you want to discuss Melbourne's climate or not?

And I commented on the lack of equatorial heating, which you ignored and then tried to make a point on hemispheres.

If you lot are going to quote posts, discuss the post and stop throwing out red herrings. Yes, I know you believe we are in the midst of a climate emergency.

Focus!

I have posted my argument many many times here about the Melbourne temperatures about higher lows from 1910 onwards. So you have moved from Melbourne to the equator now? maybe next up you would like to discuss Tassie or cairns? whatever stats you can cherry pick?

 

[Total Power]

Again you want to discuss points not raised. Yes I posted the Melbourne temperatures. Do you want to discuss Melbourne's climate or not?

And I commented on the lack of equatorial heating, which you ignored and then tried to make a point on hemispheres.

If you lot are going to quote posts, discuss the post and stop throwing out red herrings. Yes, I know you believe we are in the midst of a climate emergency.

Focus!

I will answer your question. It's because you lack scientific understanding cause you are a denier. Here to answer while the polar regions and northern and southerm hems are heating up faster than equator. What you stated is absolutely consistent with the AGW theory.

https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/polarwarming.htm

One of the earliest and consistent predictions of global warming theory is that the polar regions would increase in temperature to a far greater degree than the equatorial regions. This prediction is plausible for several reasons. First of all, the polar regions are subject to the ice-albedo feedback; i.e., as sea ice and snow fields melt the ground and open water absorb more of the Sun's radiation. Second, the air of the polar regions is dry, so dry that they are deserts as much as the Sahara is. Being dry the polar air has very little of the overwhelmingly most important greenhouse gas, water vapor. In moister regions carbon dioxide is a relatively small proportion of the greenhouse gases, but in the dry regions it is relatively more important. Thus if the concentration of carbon dioxide doubles there is relatively smaller effect in moister regions than in the dryer regions so the temperature effect of the increased carbon dioxide is greater in the dryer regions. But, if the atmosphere in the polar regions warms there will be more evaporation and thus a postive feedback from greenhouse effect of increased water vapor.

 

[demondavey]

I'm not going to put up with this much longer. Do yolu want to discuss the actual points raised or not? McLean iidentified a plethora of egregious errors in the data which were accpeted by the Met Office.

No, you’re wrong, he didn’t identify a PLETHORA of errors. He picked out a minuscule amount of problems from millions of pieces of data!

His audit was found to riddled with errors by other climate scientists. As Total Power has stated; this information was cherry picked.

Ron, mate, Bob Carter was a regular on Alan Jones’s program; the most bigoted, sceptical, radio extremist that got around. He was paid millions by his right wing employer to discredit global warming and claim it a leftist agenda.

Yes, McLean is a scientist, but he is widely recognised by his peers as having done a very very botched and poor job looking at snippets of information.

 

[demondavey]

No, you need to start taking what I post at face value. I feel the cold more. If nobody kept count and you asked me, I'd have guessed it's colder than it was 30 years ago.

Go off the long run mate, then you’ll not get cold

 

[demondavey]

I didn't look. If McLean was a kook then his research would've been knocked back. He is not disputing global warming; the newspaper raised the prospect of climate models being unduly influenced by errors.

He has selected the information he wants to share! Why do you think he was mentored by Bob Carter? Jones has his claws in Carter. Why do you think he appeared with Malcolm Roberts? You’d not get a single respected scientist engaging with that cretin.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Ron, mate, Bob Carter was a regular on Alan Jones’s program

Hang on, who's Carter?

McLean has been an official reviewer of past IPCC reports. Not sure why you're attempting to discredit him.

Climate science is a bit like Victorian government reviews of hotel security. You find in Dan's favour, or you're finished! The McLeans of the world should be encouraged for the balance they bring.

 

[Total Power]

I must thank demondavey the flogging the deniers copped in the last few pages is worth it's weight in gold

 

[Fadge]

I must thank demondavey the flogging the deniers copped in the last few pages is worth it's weight in gold

Yes, those anonymous Wordpress blogs he posts are absolutely compelling, aren't they!

 

[demondavey]

Hang on, who's Carter?

McLean has been an official review of past IPCC reports. Not sure why you're attempting to discredit him.

Climate science is a bit like Victorian government reviews of hotel security. You find in Dan's favour, or you're finished! The McLeans of the world should be encouraged to bring balance.

I am discrediting him because he has been cut down for cherry picking his information and not accurately auditing information. He came up with the theory that 2011 would be the coolest since 1956; well that was wrong wasn’t it?

91 climate experts and over 6000 citations would suggest otherwise to McLeans information. Do you actually think Dan Andrews will survive this? I am not finding anything in his favour, and I’ve really tried, I rate the man, but * me it should’ve been handled better; particularly when you’ve got security guards rooting hotel guests.

Bob Carter? A known climate sceptic. Another one in the minority discredited by his more well informed peers.

 

[demondavey]

Hang on, who's Carter?

McLean has been an official reviewer of past IPCC reports. Not sure why you're attempting to discredit him.

Climate science is a bit like Victorian government reviews of hotel security. You find in Dan's favour, or you're finished! The McLeans of the world should be encouraged for the balance they bring.

You want to listen to a respected and educated source? Go and listen or read on David Karoly. He himself was once a sceptic. Since then he has immersed himself in science and become a leading commentator and specialist in the science industry.

Ron, I get it mate, you’re a dinosaur, you have backward and ancient views on a lot of topics and quite frankly your view on this doesn’t surprise me. Are you wrong or am I in disagreement on everything you say? No. There’s a place for a world that is not totally PC or sanitised. There’s a place to question things, but mate, when the data and credible minds come together collectively and tell us something; us being ignorant to the specialisation of their field, you sort of have to respect it.

There’s no ‘conspiracy’ there’s no reason to profit from this agenda. There’s more to lose from listening to the right wingers who have the coal lobby groups on side with the far right of the conservatives.

 

[Ron The Bear]

I am discrediting him because he has been cut down for cherry picking his information and not accurately auditing information. He came up with the theory that 2011 would be the coolest since 1956; well that was wrong wasn’t it?

"It is very hard to predict, especially the future."

- Niels Bohr

Doesn't make him any worse than many thousands of other climate scientists who've had a stab and failed.

Nobody - on either side of the debate - has a decent enough handle on climate to be able to predict the future. Best to stick to (unadulterated) observation while our knowledge accumulates.

Bob Carter? A known climate sceptic. Another one in the minority discredited by his more well informed peers.

Turns out he's dead. Can you kill him twice?

 

[Ron The Bear]

Ron, I get it mate, you’re a dinosaur, you have backward and ancient views on a lot of topics and quite frankly your view on this doesn’t surprise me. Are you wrong or am I in disagreement on everything you say? No. There’s a place for a world that is not totally PC or sanitised. There’s a place to question things, but mate, when the data and credible minds come together collectively and tell us something; us being ignorant to the specialisation of their field, you sort of have to respect it.

You're heeding research that is searching almost exclusively for proof of anthropogenic warming. The field of climate science is cancel culture in microcosm.

And no, I'm not ready to let the freaks take over the world just yet.

 

[Ron The Bear]

You want to listen to a respected and educated source? Go and listen or read on David Karoly. He himself was once a sceptic. Since then he has immersed himself in science and become a leading commentator and specialist in the science industry.

Karoly's a name I know. The guy who withdrew from the debate with Happer.

 

[Total Power]

"It is very hard to predict, especially the future."

- Niels Bohr

Doesn't make him any worse than many thousands of other climate scientists who've had a stab and failed.

The earth is warming, this is agreed by almost everyone except for the likes of Anthony Watts. The relaionship with the co2 is undeniable. Solar activity is at a low yet the earth has warmed considerably over the past few decades. What's causing the warming? the CC denialists said it was the sun in the 70s when solar activity was higher, now it's low and it's still warming.

How long are you guys going to hide the fact cause it's snowing in Tassie ?

Last decade was Earth's hottest on record as climate crisis accelerates

2019 was second or third hottest year ever recorded, with average global temperature of last 10 years up 0.39C than long-term average

www.theguardian.com

 

[Ron The Bear]

The earth is warming, this is agreed by almost everyone except for the likes of Anthony Watts. The relaionship with the co2 is undeniable. Solar activity is at a low yet the earth has warmed considerably over the past few decades. What's causing the warming? the CC denialists said it was the sun in the 70s when solar activity was higher, now it's low and it's still warming.

Yes it is warming modestly. Not in dispute.

Measurements at Mauna Loa show no change to the rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 despite the global industrial slowdown caused by coronavirus. I’ve seen little comment on it. What’s your explanation?