Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nickbat]

I guess a few of you realise that I'm quite into weather and climate. I found this website and it is a fascinating read for all. Basically, it is a record of the weather in the UK since 4000BC, based on historical writings and anecdotal evidence.

We often read in today's press about "unprecedented weather" and how "it's all down to emissions of greenhouse gases" or some other twaddle. If you look at these records, you'll realise that we're actually having a pretty good time of it, climate-wise.

Example of an entry:

1141 AD (year may have been 1140): (possibly May 19th, new-style): Welsburn (now Wellesbourne), Warwickshire .. " a very violent whirlwind (i.e. a tornado) sprang up, a hideous darkness extended from the earth to the sky & the house of a priest was violently shaken, and all of his outbuildings were thrown down and broken to pieces ". Some 40 houses severely damaged, and large hailstones, (noted as the size of pigeons' eggs) fell, one of which killed a woman (& possibly one other).

This is the first record of a tornado that has been deduced by TORRO, and they assess it at T5 (in a scale that extends from T0 to T10).

Link:
http://www.booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/histclimat.htm  

Enjoy!

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I take it from your previous posts that you are not a great believer in climate change and global warming......can you tell us all your reasons for this.

[Mr Skrunts]

Do you have any of the weather checking gear that connects to your computer or has the stand alone display.  The sort of gear for checking wind speed, rain fall, temp etc.

I keep seeing the kits on the Maplins flyers etc, and was wondering if they or any other epuipment is recommoneded by anyone.

TIA.  

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=222461&C=Newsletter&U=08P10-4&T=-10967729  This is off todays special offer email.

[Nickbat]

I take it from your previous posts that you are not a great believer in climate change and global warming......can you tell us all your reasons for this.

You are right in your assertion.

You have asked very courteously and your request demands a considered and, hopefully, helpful response. I will need a bit of time to collate all the information I have. It's a bit late right now and I have some work on, but I WILL respond asap. Your patience will be rewarded with a full reply!  

Nick

[Entwood]

I take it from your previous posts that you are not a great believer in climate change and global warming......can you tell us all your reasons for this.

You are right in your assertion.

You have asked very courteously and your request demands a considered and, hopefully, helpful response. I will need a bit of time to collate all the information I have. It's a bit late right now and I have some work on, but I WILL respond asap. Your patience will be rewarded with a full reply!  

Nick

I can do it much easier ......

'COS IT'S NOT TRUE ... climate changes all the time, 10 years ago we were heading for an Ice Age, now we have Global Warming .. anything to sell papers and make money.

[Nickbat]

Do you have any of the weather checking gear that connects to your computer or has the stand alone display.  The sort of gear for checking wind speed, rain fall, temp etc.

I keep seeing the kits on the Maplins flyers etc, and was wondering if they or any other epuipment is recommoneded by anyone.

TIA.  

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=222461&C=Newsletter&U=08P10-4&T=-10967729  This is off todays special offer email.

Hi Skruntie!

No, I don't have that equipment, although it looks good. Sad as I am, I normally check the VOLMET airport reports late at night (on my Airband radio) and make a mental note of wind speed, direction, temperature, dew point, pressure and so on, and build up an idea of the weather patterns and likely prognosis.

Possibly the coldest night of the autumn so far, tonight. Last night it was just 9 degrees at Luton when I hit the sack.

Pass me that anorak!  

[Bandit127]

Do you have any of the weather checking gear that connects to your computer or has the stand alone display.  The sort of gear for checking wind speed, rain fall, temp etc.

I keep seeing the kits on the Maplins flyers etc, and was wondering if they or any other epuipment is recommoneded by anyone.

TIA.  

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=222461&C=Newsletter&U=08P10-4&T=-10967729  This is off todays special offer email.

What you need Skruntie is what this guy has.
Obviously quiet right now but great to watch when something wicked is coming your way
http://www.isleofwightweather.co.uk/live_storm_data.htm

[Kevin Wood]

Quite a nice online weather station at the gliding club near me:

http://www.lashamweather.co.uk/

I love storm tracker too. Mrs. KW is a bit nuts over thunderstorms - and usually goes off chasing them when the stormtracker starts kicking off!

Kevin

[robbo299]

I have used that site before Bandit. It's a very good site. Great for tracking any thunderstorms which may be heading your way. I was at work recently showing the site to a few co-workers when there was a lightning hit close by which caused a power dip and knocked out a few of our production machines. One minute later that strike showed up on the screen. They were impressed.....then we had to go and sort out the machines! Took us a couple of hours.

[Nickbat]

For Optimist 60 (and anyone else interested):

Being inquisitive by nature, when I first heard about the claims of global warming, I decided to look into the science. The first thought that hit me was how can a benign gas (which is vital to all life on the planet) be such a problem, especially when it only makes up 0.038% of our atmosphere (and humans contribute only a fraction of that!)?

Then I decided to look at the IPCC, the so-called body that represents 2,500 scientists.

I’ll leave it Dr Vincent Gray, a member of the UN IPCC Expert Reviewers Panel since its inception, who called for abolishing the IPCC saying: [Excerpt]: “The whole process is a swindle, The IPCC from the beginning was given the licence to use whatever methods would be necessary to provide "evidence" that carbon dioxide increases are harming the climate, even if this involves manipulation of dubious data and using peoples' opinions instead of science to "prove" their case.” (see http://www.nov55.com/ipcc.html)

Then I looked at Al Gore, the high-priest of global warming. His film, “An Inconvenient Truth” contained many errors, including the famous “hockey-stick” graph which has been completely debunked (see  www.http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2008/8/11/caspar-and-the-jesus-paper.html), yet is still being shown in schools. His latest revised “hockey-stick” has been shredded by the Steve McIntyre at climate audit as well (see http://www.climate-audit.org)
 
Then, I found that Al Gore has a few financial interests in global warming, as well as leading a hypocritical lifestyle (see: http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/08/07/al-gore-the-environment-guru-has-a-big-house-flies-in-big-planes-and-now-captains-a-big-boat/).

The Global Warming scam was started by James Hansen, who last week was flown to the UK by Greenpeace to defend the Kingsnorth power station protestors who had caused £35k worth of damage. They got off! (see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/14/do1402.xml)

Scientifically, the debate carries on only on the web, as the mainsteam media will not (for whatever reason) generally report contrary views. There are many scientists who disagree with the Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming [AGW] theory. An excellent reference website is here: http://middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html. (Jim Peden, the author is a highly-respected scientist).

Of course, the problem is that the world is cooling despite the rise in CO2, and the Sun has become practically spotless. But, has it been actually been as warm in the last part of the 20th century as the warmists claim? There are many surface temperature stations that do not meet standards and, over the years, have become affected by urbanisition. Take a look at this aspect and many others at http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/ (a very popular scientific website).

So what do we have? In my mind we have a lack of open scientific debate. We have allegations of fraud and manipulation of data. On top of that, we have mainstream media (especially the BBC) who have become mouthpieces for AGW alarmists.

But why? If this is just about CO2 and its alleged effects on climate, why not open debate? Why all the nastiness (especially from the alarmists side, who seem to launch personal attacks on anyone who questions the “accepted science”)  

Thankfully, there are still few voices of commonsense to be heard. Take Vaclav Klaus, the President of the Czech Republic, for example (see http://klaus.cz/klaus2/asp/clanek.asp?id=KaTffYUet0Rm)._


But the nagging questions remain: “Where is the open debate?”, and  “Why the nastiness?”

I’ve always thought that conspiracy theories (like 9/11) were largely stupid and served only to feed the ignorant who couldn’t think for themselves.

But then, I did find this ominous quote:

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill."  

Club of Rome
The First Global Revolution

Then I looked at who the members of this mysterious Club of Rome were:
 
Al Gore
Maurice Strong (author of the Kyoto Protocol)
Sir Crispin Ticknell, leading climate change campaigner
Tony Blair
Richard Branson
etc…

See: http://green-agenda.com/gaians.html

Read some amazing quotes here: http://green-agenda.com/index.html

..but don’t read the whole website unless you want a sleepless night!  


…then you find that the Secretary General of the Club of Rome, Martin Lees, is also a member of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, which exists for the “Research and Governance of Social-Ecological Systems”. See: http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/networks/planetaryboundaries/planetaryboundariesthescientistsandexperts.4.39aa239f11a8dd8de6b80006760.html …alongside James Hansen, and Tim Lenton, who is at the  UAE, which is not a million miles away from the Met Office’s Hadley Centre for Climate Change.

On top of the overwhelming scientific evidence against AGW, the political undertones represent an extra reason why I don’t buy into it.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive

Sir Walter Scott

[Entwood]

Nice post    Well researched with good links  

Unfortunately .. the "Global Warming" enthusiasts will have you shot at dawn for daring to disagree with them... why ??

MONEY .. global warming .. wether true or not .. has become a "money maker" ... research grants from governments, taxes on consumers, jolly little trips to conferences, chances of Media interviews etc etc etc..

Those on the gravy train will not wish to see it derailed ..   why let the truth get in the way of a good money making story

[cem_devecioglu]

Nickbat ,
very good and detailed post


ps: reading in the details I understand that the temperature difference I feel from  childhood is my fat body

[DaveyDavey]

1976 was a pivotal year for climate change, because up until that point the consensus was that the earth was going to be approaching an ice age. Then there was a huge heat wave which made a bit of a mockery of the scientific supposition to that date. The science behind the theories was sound, it's just the theory expressed that we were heading for global cooling was wrong.

However, despite all the conspiracy theorists out there I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that human development has had a dramatic effect on the atmosphere.

Studies from a variety of Antarctic cores indicate that atmospheric CO2 levels were about 260 – 280 ppmv (parts per million)immediately before the industrial revolution and did not vary much from this level during the preceding 10,000 years. During the industrial revolution, CO2 levels were recorded from ice cores at around 375ppm. Over the 400,000 years prior to the industrial revolution the maximum observed level of CO2 in the atmosphere didn't exceed 300ppm.

From the late 1950s to date the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased steadily from around 315ppm to around 380ppm (that's 27% higher than the highest ever recorded level over the last 400,000 years.

Human development has, I think, contributed to the volatility of weather that we are currently experiencing.

Ice is melting at an alarming rate, be it the ice caps or indeed the numerous glaciers around the world. Surely the only sensible explanation for that is an increase in temperature?

[Nickbat]

1976 was a pivotal year for climate change, because up until that point the consensus was that the earth was going to be approaching an ice age. Then there was a huge heat wave which made a bit of a mockery of the scientific supposition to that date. The science behind the theories was sound, it's just the theory expressed that we were heading for global cooling was wrong.

However, despite all the conspiracy theorists out there I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that human development has had a dramatic effect on the atmosphere.

Studies from a variety of Antarctic cores indicate that atmospheric CO2 levels were about 260 – 280 ppmv (parts per million)immediately before the industrial revolution and did not vary much from this level during the preceding 10,000 years. During the industrial revolution, CO2 levels were recorded from ice cores at around 375ppm. Over the 400,000 years prior to the industrial revolution the maximum observed level of CO2 in the atmosphere didn't exceed 300ppm.

From the late 1950s to date the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased steadily from around 315ppm to around 380ppm (that's 27% higher than the highest ever recorded level over the last 400,000 years.

Human development has, I think, contributed to the volatility of weather that we are currently experiencing.

Ice is melting at an alarming rate, be it the ice caps or indeed the numerous glaciers around the world. Surely the only sensible explanation for that is an increase in temperature?

Interesting points, but:

The Ice Age scare of the 1970s: In 1971, the Washington Post ran a scare piece entitled "U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming" which fretted that burning fossil fuels discharges particles into the atmosphere that reflect the sun's rays back into space. Emissions over 5–10 years supposedly "could be sufficient to trigger an ice age."

The NASA research behind this hysteria was supported by a computer program developed by Dr. James Hansen. (Yes, the same man that started the current warming scare, although there is no evidence to show he necessarily support the ice age claims, despite the use of his computer model).  


CO2 levels:
"It was believed that snow accumulating on ice sheets would preserve the contemporaneous atmosphere trapped between snowflakes during snowfalls, so that the CO2 content of air inclusions in cores from ice sheets should reveal paleoatmospheric CO2 levels. Jaworowski et al. (1992 b) compiled all such CO2 data available, finding that CO2 levels ranged from 140 to 7,400 ppmv. However, such paleoatmospheric CO2 levels published after 1985 were never reported to be higher than 330 ppmv. Analyses reported in 1982 (Neftel at al., 1982) from the more than 2,000 m deep Byrd ice core (Antarctica), showing unsystematic values from about 190 to 420 ppmv, were falsely "filtered" when the alleged same data showed a rising trend from about 190 ppmv at 35,000 years ago to about 290 ppmv (Callendar's pre-industrial baseline) at 4,000 years ago when re-reported in 1988 (Neftel et al., 1988); shown by Jaworowski et al. (1992 b) in their Fig. 5...."

"....The most famous ice core, the Vostok (Antarctica) core, with air inclusions allegedly representing the global paleoatmospheres over the last 160,000 years, show CO2 levels below 200 ppmv for many tens of thousands of years spanning 30,000 to 110,000 years BP (Barnola et al., 1987). "Most geochemists were convinced that changes such as these could not occur", says Sarmiento (1991) about these low alleged paleoatmospheric CO2 levels. Such low atmospheric CO2 levels below approximately 250 ppmv (McKay et al., 1991) would have led to extinction of certain plant species. This has not been recorded by paleobotanists, showing clearly that the ice core CO2 results are not representative of paleoatmospheres (Jaworowski et al., 1992 b), hence the CO2-ice-core-method and its results must be rejected."

Link to quote above: http://folk.uio.no/tomvs/esef/ESEF3VO2.htm

Ice melt:
Not alarming at all. The Arctic is up 9.4% over last year, while the Antarctic ice extent increased at a rate of 0.6% per decade from 1979 to 2006 (quote from Donald Cavalieri, a senior research scientist at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland).
 
Remember that the press made a big deal about the Arctic ice retreating to its lowest-ever level last year. What they didn't say was that satellite data, on which their claim was made, only go back to 1979!!

..and while we on about the Arctic, a bunch of twits including Sam Branson, son of Sir Richard Branson, and Lewis Gordon Pugh (the main hero, the world's #1 cold-water swimmer) decided to prove man-made global warming by a trip from Spitsbergen to the place with the most devastating heat wave - the North Pole.  . Guess what? They gave up when they got stuck in ice, turned South and headed home! Then they claimed they had reached the furthest North anyone had in a Kayak (with 300 tonne support ship). Unfortunately, everyone knows that the Arctic has been navigable many times in the past. In 1922, it was possible to sail to 81N in ice free water. The twits got stuck at 80N, or thereabouts.  

Oh, and if you thought there was no connection between Lehman Brothers and Al Gore, think again and check out this breaking news:

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate

Honestly, you couldn't make this stuff up!  

[Dusty]

You have spent a lot of your time with this post nickbat, I take my hat off to you.

One way or another one cannot be sure about global warming.

When I was young the scientists and politicians used to forcast a future ice age. Now it has all changed.

Britain does'nt seem to be getting warmer, it seems to be getting wetter! Whether this has anything to do with global warming, we will have to wait and see.