Print

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

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Now Oxfam are jumping into the climate change debate:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8225895.stm

Who next is going to put pressure on us to do something based on uncertain facts?? :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/

I am sure Nick will have something to say!!

[Nickbat]

Oxfam have been on the bandwagon for some time, Lizzie.

It's all politics, not science. 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Oxfam have been on the bandwagon for some time, Lizzie.

It's all politics, not science. 

 

You are certainly right there Nick!

[Brick Tamland]

And I've just got a decat, oh dear how can I live with myself

[Lizzie_Zoom]

And I've just got a decat, oh dear how can I live with myself

Until your next MOT perfectly well I'd say!!

[Brick Tamland]

And I've just got a decat, oh dear how can I live with myself

Until your next MOT perfectly well I'd say!!

In 2011

[Lizzie_Zoom]

And I've just got a decat, oh dear how can I live with myself

Until your next MOT perfectly well I'd say!!

In 2011

Of course, the Irish two yearly test!! 8-) 8-)  A result then!

[Varche]

Some observations.

1. No one would listen to what any scientists say on any subject. How many people cut back on smoking, drinking, excess eating just cos a few scientists say it is bad for you?  If money is/needs to be spent it has to get "political".

2. Regardless of whether you believe that mankinds efforts at mussing up the planet with pollution etc don't have any negative effects, it is irrefutable that it is getting hotter. When was the last time that the Thames froze up? It used to do that regularly until maybe a hundred years ago. The last Ice Age was only 10,000 years ago. Sooner or later it will start cooling down again for the next ice age.

3. Personally I think mankind has developed an absolutely giant ostrich head in the sand approach to ALL the bad things he (it is mostly men) is doing to the planet. Witness the "British sending of toxic waste to Brazil" scam as just one everyday example. Most people don't give a damn. It has to get "political" to curtail such things. 

4. The people of Africa or indeed anywhere else where lack of water or food or medicine is an everyday issue should concern everyone of us. I welcome  Oxfam jumping into the debate. Perhaps if the taps were turned off in the UK regularly for indeterminate periods of time people would be more understanding?

5. One for Nickbat. Apparently the birth rate is up in Britain according to the news. So i was right, the worlds population is increasing even in the "West". Recessions are good for population increases!

Anyway time to bury my head in the (hot) sand, tarra a bit

El Varche

[Marks DTM Calib]

Point 5 is an interesting one......so I did some digging.

The Uk population has increased due to the arrival of other europeons (eastern europe), the 'native' populations birth rate has continued to decline.

[LaserLance]

Some observations.

1. No one would listen to what any scientists say on any subject. How many people cut back on smoking, drinking, excess eating just cos a few scientists say it is bad for you?  If money is/needs to be spent it has to get "political".

2. Regardless of whether you believe that mankinds efforts at mussing up the planet with pollution etc don't have any negative effects, it is irrefutable that it is getting hotter. When was the last time that the Thames froze up? It used to do that regularly until maybe a hundred years ago. The last Ice Age was only 10,000 years ago. Sooner or later it will start cooling down again for the next ice age.

3. Personally I think mankind has developed an absolutely giant ostrich head in the sand approach to ALL the bad things he (it is mostly men) is doing to the planet. Witness the "British sending of toxic waste to Brazil" scam as just one everyday example. Most people don't give a damn. It has to get "political" to curtail such things. 

4. The people of Africa or indeed anywhere else where lack of water or food or medicine is an everyday issue should concern everyone of us. I welcome  Oxfam jumping into the debate. Perhaps if the taps were turned off in the UK regularly for indeterminate periods of time people would be more understanding?

5. One for Nickbat. Apparently the birth rate is up in Britain according to the news. So i was right, the worlds population is increasing even in the "West". Recessions are good for population increases!

Anyway time to bury my head in the (hot) sand, tarra a bit

El Varche

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209396/Population-UK-tops-61million-biggest-baby-boom-generation.html
this is on front page of paper...varche

[Nickbat]

Didn't get a chance to look at this Oxfam crap earlier as I had to go out for the day. Well, I looked at it. No, I couldn't stomach the video, as I've only just eaten, but I did read the first line:


Oxfam has filmed a family living at the 'bottom of the sea' to highlight the rise in sea levels.

When Oxfam stop peddling this fraudulent science, I might start listening to them (then again, I might not).


1. Sea level rise is small, slowing, and decadal in behaviour.

"We calculate the running 10-year trends in sea level as observed from satellites, and append it to the running 10-yr trends in sea level derived by Holgate from the tide gauge network. In this context, the satellite trends (red curve in Figure 3) don’t look unusual at all—they seem to fit squarely into the pattern of long-term fluctuations. And further more, they have been declining!

So rather than evidence of accelerating sea level rise in recent years, what we have is nothing more than the same type of variation that has been going on for at least 100 years. It was merely a coincidence that the satellites began observing the sea level rise during a natural upswing in the rate of sea level rise, that has now turned into a downswing—a behavior that has repeated itself a good half-dozen times during the past century."

Summary based on the work of Simon Holgate of the U.K.’s Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2009/07/22/sea-level-rise-an-update-shows-a-slowdown/


2. For the Oxfam's "family" to be submerged would require a total collapse of the ice caps. If you don't want to read all the following, just note the last line:

"The global warming doomsday writers claim the ice sheets are melting catastrophically, and will cause a sudden rise in sea level of many metres. This ignores the mechanism of glacier flow which is by creep: glaciers are not melting from the surface down, nor are they sliding down an inclined plane lubricated by melidioter. The existence of ice over 3 km thick preserving details of past snowfall and atmospheres, used to decipher past temperature and CO2 levels, shows that the ice sheets have accumulated for hundreds of thousands of years without melting. Variations in melting around the edges of ice sheets are no indication that they are collapsing. Indeed 'collapse' is impossible."

See page 20 of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists August 09 paper
http://aig.org.au/assets/244/AIGnews_Aug09.pdf

OXFAM will never get a penny out of me.   

[Banjax]

Some observations.

1. No one would listen to what any scientists say on any subject. How many people cut back on smoking, drinking, excess eating just cos a few scientists say it is bad for you?  If money is/needs to be spent it has to get "political".

2. Regardless of whether you believe that mankinds efforts at mussing up the planet with pollution etc don't have any negative effects, it is irrefutable that it is getting hotter. When was the last time that the Thames froze up? It used to do that regularly until maybe a hundred years ago. The last Ice Age was only 10,000 years ago. Sooner or later it will start cooling down again for the next ice age.

3. Personally I think mankind has developed an absolutely giant ostrich head in the sand approach to ALL the bad things he (it is mostly men) is doing to the planet. Witness the "British sending of toxic waste to Brazil" scam as just one everyday example. Most people don't give a damn. It has to get "political" to curtail such things. 

4. The people of Africa or indeed anywhere else where lack of water or food or medicine is an everyday issue should concern everyone of us. I welcome  Oxfam jumping into the debate. Perhaps if the taps were turned off in the UK regularly for indeterminate periods of time people would be more understanding?

5. One for Nickbat. Apparently the birth rate is up in Britain according to the news. So i was right, the worlds population is increasing even in the "West". Recessions are good for population increases!

Anyway time to bury my head in the (hot) sand, tarra a bit

El Varche

Spot on El Varche 

who needs "scientific"  "proof" based on "observation" and "facts" when a couple of websites can dismiss the overwhelming majority of research because of some conspiracy theory on climate change?

if you don't believe that man is adversely affecting the environment than you have to believe that every major country on the planet, every government, national research body, the entire global scientific community, would have to be in on some giant conspiracy to make us believe something that isn't true.

thats religions job i thought?   

[Banjax]

here's those cranks at NASA - what are they like? 

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/


time to put this debate to bed (plus i need another 16 posts)

[Nickbat]

here's those cranks at NASA - what are they like? 

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/


time to put this debate to bed (plus i need another 16 posts)

Nasa's figures are not their own, they come from the UN IPCC.

"Average global temperatures in the Early Carboniferous Period were hot- approximately 20° C (68° F). However, cooling during the Middle Carboniferous reduced average global temperatures to about 12° C (54° F).

Similarly, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Early Carboniferous Period were approximately 1500 ppm (parts per million), but by the Middle Carboniferous had declined to about 350 ppm -- comparable to average CO2 concentrations today!

Earth's atmosphere today contains about 380 ppm CO2 (0.038%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2- impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.

Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time

Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).

There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.7 times higher than today. The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm -- about 18 times higher than today.

The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming.

Temperature after C.R. Scotese http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm
CO2 after R.A. Berner, 2001 (GEOCARB III)

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

Debate over? No, Bannjaax, it's only just beginning.

[Nickbat]

Some observations.

1. No one would listen to what any scientists say on any subject. How many people cut back on smoking, drinking, excess eating just cos a few scientists say it is bad for you?  If money is/needs to be spent it has to get "political".

2. Regardless of whether you believe that mankinds efforts at mussing up the planet with pollution etc don't have any negative effects, it is irrefutable that it is getting hotter. When was the last time that the Thames froze up? It used to do that regularly until maybe a hundred years ago. The last Ice Age was only 10,000 years ago. Sooner or later it will start cooling down again for the next ice age.

3. Personally I think mankind has developed an absolutely giant ostrich head in the sand approach to ALL the bad things he (it is mostly men) is doing to the planet. Witness the "British sending of toxic waste to Brazil" scam as just one everyday example. Most people don't give a damn. It has to get "political" to curtail such things. 

4. The people of Africa or indeed anywhere else where lack of water or food or medicine is an everyday issue should concern everyone of us. I welcome  Oxfam jumping into the debate. Perhaps if the taps were turned off in the UK regularly for indeterminate periods of time people would be more understanding?

5. One for Nickbat. Apparently the birth rate is up in Britain according to the news. So i was right, the worlds population is increasing even in the "West". Recessions are good for population increases!

Anyway time to bury my head in the (hot) sand, tarra a bit

El Varche

Spot on El Varche 

who needs "scientific"  "proof" based on "observation" and "facts" when a couple of websites (Try thousands, Bannjaax)! can dismiss the overwhelming majority of research (NOT the overwhelming majority, Bannjaax) because of some conspiracy theory on climate change?

if you don't believe that man is adversely affecting the environment than you have to believe that every major country on the planet, every government, national research body, the entire global scientific community, would have to be in on some giant conspiracy to make us believe something that isn't true.

thats religions job i thought?