pottyprof

Maybe...... Maybe not. We won't be here after December 21st anyway.

I agree. The thing I was getting at was the lack of clarity and the similarity. Kids are left to do their own research pretty much. That's great stuff Ian. The more they get to see at that age, the easier their understanding becomes when they are older. The more they understand, the more they can make up their own mind on things. The clearer the information is the more likely it is that they pick the correct answer. This is a forum for all ages and was just pointing out how my daughter saw things in your post. It shows how confusing this subject can be but yet it will be that age group that may have a major job of tidying up the mess if methane becomes a major problem. Kids only have a short attention span and we need to be able to use that span to grab their attention.

Had to post this because my twins (age 10) read these pages. One of them came out with this statement.... Now if they can see the problem with conflicting messages you can understand why many adults think AGW is a load of tosh.

While at the same time, NASA scientists were forecasting things to get higher still...... I don't hear any sceptics revising their claim downwards....

It's strange that we had a nearly blank northern hemisphere a couple of weeks ago and now there's the opposite.... Very strange maxima.

I agree. The last ocean discussion thread is now archived but I've started a new one. I think this subject has more sound-bites than enough. Well.... I don't suppose one more waffle-word will do any harm....

What is in store for two thirds of our planet? Is the carbon cycle dropping hints about the future of the oceans? If the ocean becomes more acidic, what happens to the animal kingdom and plants that rely on them? Is there anything we can do to prevent any failure of the support systems or is it already too late considering the length of the circulation currents? Discuss.......

A bit of uncertainty then?

Back then there were debates about many things, just as there are today but negative PDO was one of the questions being asked at the time. Call it the flavour of the day type of thing. Over the last couple of years GW has pretty much used it as a trophy type of thing. I don't think the answers settled anything then or will settle them now.

There were a couple of German stations working the aurora on the 2m amateur radio band last night. Makes for an interesting listening session because of the way the aurora changes the way a signal sounds. This isn't a recording of last night but it's a good example of how the signal is heard. aurora.mp3

Busy covering the end of the world in about a months time. They have to plan where they need to be to get the best angles to convince us we're doomed...

Given the need to get kids interested in science I think it would be a programme that could very much fill that kind of slot. It needs the same treatment as Countryfile had. It doesn't need dumbing down, just made more interesting to the younger end. Science can be exciting and astronomy is certainly that.

Tease!!

Fair point. I hope they pick him up on it though...

If this is true, then I think we need to be asking our dear leaders to ask just what the hell they are playing at? These idiots are supposed to be advising world leaders on policy. If they know something that is going to 'shock' people then I think we need to know now, not in a years time. This is just the thing which makes people question the whole debate. Whoever has sponsored this goon needs to be asking more than a few questions. What a joke.

I think the Atlantic side is going to be problematic for a good while yet with all those warmer waters flowing up the eastern American coast.

No you're not wrong. We perceive 'normal' because that's what we see/learn/understand. It's something to do with quantum theory but can't for the life of me remember but I think it has something to do with electron rotation.

It has to have an effect. Perhaps their influence is what we see as 'normal' so therefore we are already picking these observations up? Strong magnetic fields are a real head scrambler.

I agree. It's good that someone is still using the old way of doing things to keep the data set reliable as a comparison for events. The advance in technology provides for some great animations and filtering so I won't knock what it can do. A place for everything I think.

This one goes back to 1947. Monthly adjusted figures. ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SOLAR_RADIO/FLUX/Penticton_Adjusted/monthly/MONTHLY.ADJ I'll try and find a UV one later. Edit. It looks like some of the UV data sets use the 10.7 as part of a proxy. Whether it matters or not is anyone's guess I suppose? Most of the real UV data has been collected in shortish lived experiments until about 2000. I'll have another look around after some kip. There must be a usable dataset spanning a few decades somewhere.

Thanks for the detail Sam. Some interesting points there. I'm just wondering if you could do a similar thing with the Solar flux rather than spots?

Considering we are currently around about solar max, the sun is incredibly quiet...

They work better when they don't get hit by UFO's.... or fall to bits in the breeze due to the wrong type of wind....

I don't know what to think about the wind turbine thing. The impracticality is starting to raise its head I think. Personally, I think they are a good idea and have been supportive of local plans but they're not suitable for everywhere. Maybe they've seen potential for new energy sources which were mentioned higher up in this thread? Maybe the moon really is made of cheese?

Now we know why Sandy was strange. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/31/superstorm-sandy-secret-engineering-by-iran-syria_n_2049411.html?1351697412 Well it's the nearest thing we have for proof for a while anyway....