Red Raven

Why not start the graph from last summer and end the winter just gone and surprise surprise we can show cooling. That graph indicates nothing other than a cooling over the past 7 years - extend it by another 7 and the then another 7 and show me the same graph. It is just plain daft to look at such a narrow band of data and come to such a sweeping conclusion.

To put it succinctly. What you are calling for is intellectual rigour and an arrival at an unbiased conclusion. Yet, you don't seem to show those attributes in your 'anti' stance. The science of climate change is not politics, it may be used by politicians but this debate is about the science and as I have said before science is about the quest for knowledge nothing more nothing less. The nonesense that party politics is comes to mind for some strange reason.

But it all depends what is causing this. Is it part of a pattern that has occurred many times before or is this something new? Nothing should be ignored and certainly within recorded history this is an unusual event and as such should be examined. You cant just say 'pah, it's hardly significant' without examining the data etc - that's just bad science (in fact it's not science at all).

There's always an alternative interpretation and one should never jump to assumptions based on limited evidence. Anyone wanting truth must keep an open mind. A hand warmer, by its nature, retains heat for as long as possible. That ability is due to its thermal conductivity properties - the same properties that will retain cold as it does heat. Is this rather Heath Robinson arrangement simply to allow the temperature measured at depth to be retained as it is pulled up into daylight. A better, less cynical view of its purpose is merely something to aid more accurate temperature readings. I see no conspiracy or fraud. I do see on Watts blog someone blinded by cynicism.

Do you really think they would post such an image on their own official site if it had actually been of a piece of equipment fixed to produce false data. If this is a piece of falsifying equipment then do you not see the irony? If they are so stupid to post the evidence very clearly on their own site then surly they are not intelligent enough to even understand what conspiracy means - give us a break. Also I think you will find if a hand warmer is strapped to a thermometer as is suggested by Watsy then the temperatures would be a little obviously warm. -40 to at least plus 30 - this really is a very silly discussion. :lol:

154 years is a lot longer than the 9 years the AGW sceptics are using as irrefutable evidence of global cooling. My concern is that both sides have become hugely politicised with the sceptics looking to find holes in the opposition rather than look for evidence or develop an alternative theory that their view is correct. I think you will find that even Jim Hansen would do a complete u-turn if the science warranted it. Any scientists is simply looking for knowledge not conspiring to dupe the world.

A very simple question. Why do people believe that the theory of AGW is one huge conspiracy? Ok, the theory could prove to be incorrect but to suggest that their is a controlling hand in all this is rather crazy. The argument has certainly become very polarised and the sceptics in the north have been pleased with the cooler winter but I wonder what the argument is like in the southern hemisphere where Australia has had record high temperatures with part of the country raised to the ground with wild fires and the other drowned in floods.

This suggestion and most other geoengineered suggestions is as false and miss-directed as someone who is obesely overweight taking medication to help them loose weight but still continue to eat an unhealthy amount of unhealthy food - they may look fitter and healthier but they are not. The only solution is to change their diet. It's a case of wanting your cake and to eat it too!

Wilkins Ice Shelf is on the brink of breaking away. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7984054.stm

If he was simple expressing his views and taking part in a debate fine, but he has imposed his views that he cannot verify and has made no attempt to verify. It's like me saying Marmite should be banned because I don't like it - shouldn't we expect a little more rigorous intelligence from those that lead us?

Isn't it a crime? Well maybe crime is too big a word but surely it does break the fundamental rule of science; that is to continually question and verify the thesis (what ever it may be). And at the moment the weight of evidence falls clearly on the side of evolutuion and suggests that creationism is some very simple fictional story to make the complexities of life a little more understandable. I for one would question the ability of a scientist if they believed in creationism. Science should be the product of a rational mind. Edit Bobski got in just before me but I do agree with his concerns. On the Sammy issue - no he should not have banned the ad. It's censorship and an example of how dictatorship can so easily creep into the democratic process and be excused as democratic because some people voted for him. They voted for him to do the right thing within a framework of whatever political colour he comes not ti impose some personally held belief.

And mine can be found at http://www.lortonweather.co.uk/Analysis-2008.htm. Coldest year yet! Last night just after midnight so not in 2008 records I recorded my all time low of -9.8C

That'll be namby pamby Pennine fells weather for ya. :wacko: It's still only -5.3 here after a low of -8.3. Not the coldest night of the year but close.

Greenland has not always been at the pole either.

I'd say this version of wave power is even better. http://www.ceto.com.au/home.php

The Earth First group have been around since the late 70's preaching and doing exactly what the article says since those early days. This report is just another one from the more paranoid world we live. I'm not condoning the actions just simply stating that this is not a new threat it is one we have been living with for the past 30 years or more - it has just become more topical.

Proving to be a very wet year here. Month, Total(mm), Departure from norm 1 189.2 87.3 2 82.4 9.0 3 112.8 34.5 4 38.6 -12.1 5 16.0 -39.0 6 123.0 55.1 7 104.8 36.6 8 125.2 38.1 9 128.6 35.4 10 305.8 194.9

I agree it is something for another thread but it is important in any theory testing that it is the actual theory that is tested and not the popular press interpretations of it that go under scrutiny.

...but you didn't take the opportunity to remove the god reference - seems you have shot yourself in the other foot now!

I was keeping an open mind to your theories but you have just done yourself a huge disservice by suggesting this is all one big plan by a man with a white beard!

Yep. Other species may see 500-1000 year time frame to be rapid.

If only it were that simple. It is more correct to say climate change = hunger, misery, death, resource wars. Up or down any rapid change is very bad news for the world us humans have evolved to thrive in.

And for what its worth mine too. :lol:

So you are happy remaining ignorant and as Stephen Hawking's put it - stagnating. One thing for sure stagnation makes your feet rot off. :lol:

It's an experiment. The purpose of an experiment is to verify theory. If the theory verifies then those theories become the rules and guides for developing new technologies. If it doesn't verify then a new theory gets developed. In this experiment, which is one that is attempting to verify the building blocks of the universe, the out come is likely to have untold and countless benefits to human kind. The questions it asks are not just technological ones but also fundamental philosophical ones, the outcome of that is immeasurable and profound. What more do you want for a paltry 5 billion? :lol: