weather eater

I'll second that.

I did find this on Axel-Morner the man quoted in this article He is listed as an "allied expert" for a Canadian group called the "Natural Resource Stewardship Project," (NRSP) a lobby organization that refuses to disclose it's funding sources. The NRSP is led by executive director Tom Harris and Dr. Tim Ball. An Oct. 16, 2006 CanWest Global news article on who funds the NRSP, it states that "a confidentiality agreement doesn't allow him [Tom Harris] to say whether energy companies are funding his group." DeSmog uncovered information that two of the three Directors on the board of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project are registered energy industry lobbyists and senior executives of the High Park Advocacy Group, a Toronto based lobby firm that specializes in “energy, environment and ethics.” Do they pay him, the real danger it seems to me is that we have no idea who is telling the truth and whether their motives are genuine. Or for another view of GW go here. http://www.alexansary.com/Editorial/Sun%20...ic%20field.html

Hi TWS we should save our dissection of religion for another place or by PM as we both have strong views on this. What I meant of course was getting people to see what’s plain in front of their faces, the problem being that take a hundred people and you get different perceptions of the evidence. Some people in regards non-sustainable resources don’t care about the future as long as they are doing OK now.

Unfortunately GW man does not have a noble spirit at least not as a race, human beings to use a teenagers terminology are rather to random and are motivated by many different ideologies, however the need to survive is one of our stronger traits, once that survival is threatened by a clear enemy then we can act very quickly, unfortunately judging by the debate on this thread AGW is not being recognised as that clear enemy. I've not read all this thread but I was not surprised to read that some of the Global warming sceptics were believers in intelligent design, I wonder who designed the intelligent designer, ho hum.

Some very interesting comments in your post Tamara but this interested me because natural and cyclical factors while not unproven selective science, it is still very possible that we could be vastly under or over playing their significance in climate shifts, if you then factor in the idea that nobody on either side of the argument seems willing to deal with, which is that climate is being effected by both natural and man made factors. If that’s the case then we could be sitting on a time bomb that would take even the GW lobby by surprise. You say that the sceptics are not a huge global pressure group but that’s not really the case and in two ways, firstly the do nothing lobby had for a long while the ear of the worlds leaders especially in the US and also deeds not words often have the biggest impact, inactivity can in itself create pressure in a similar manner to a vocal pressure group, because its lack of words and inactivity sends a message to others that there is no need to worry, you only have to read some of the posts, on the climate threads, many of which repeat the mantra that scientists don’t know everything and its just natural cycles, where do they think that information about Natural cycles etc came from if not scientists, I rather suspect that many of the scientists who formulated theory’s about natural cycles are also convinced by and have worked on AGW theory. Better the devil you know is Ok until you find the devil is a ticking time bomb from which you can't escape. For me the jury’s is out but I still think we should be doing more just in case the jury finds the human race guilty as charged, look how slow we where in regards dealing with CFCs and we are still dealing with the impact of that, I bet there were plenty who wrongly doubted the link between CFCs and ozone depletion and many who understood but happily put profit before action. I rather suspect that regardless of the dangers and the pressure from any AGW theory lobbying, that there are many in big business that are doing the same now.

Mostly Joe public doesn’t give a hoot one way or another and mostly those that do most likely recognise that both AGW and natural cycles are scientific theory’s. Even with sun spots cycles, the fact is that they have only been observed and recorded for a tiny period in the earths climatic history which consequently means that our assessment of long term of solar cycles may be out over a longer period of time. As someone who sits on neither one side of the fence or the other, unequivocal evidence from either side of the debate seems rather scanty, and certain members observations seem rather cherry picked. For instance artic ice, whether we have more or less on any given year is irrelevant a clear trend can only be observed over a longer period of time, for judging climate the longer the better. In any assessment of climate be it natural or human induced, fluctuations are inevitable, this is true for, artic ice, hurricanes, global temperatures, rain fall, snow or whatever. What really gets my craw on the climate thread is the lack of real unbiased opinion, its either for or against nobody ever seems to entertain the idea that it might be both and or that other factors may be involved, other than one or two that have talked about ozone depletion for instance.

I have to say I agree with Roo, there is much debate on the climate change threads but no signs of anybody winning that debate, all we have is two entrenched camps with all that entails. What is amusing is the dismissing of scientists on the AGW side by certain members who then put forward theory’s that have been formulated by another group of scientists, I can’t count the amount of science doesn’t know everything posts that then put forward ideas formulated by another group of scientists. In fact almost everything discussed on these pages from all sides of the debate is the work of scientists from different fields in many cases the same ones.

Thats not the lockerbie plane

Isn’t it scientists that came up with the theory of natural cycles as well. Seems to me that what the AGW argument is about is which bit of scientific theory you want to believe. Common sense would seem to suggest that what might be occurring is a combination of a natural cycle and mans input but that idea does not suit the for or against camps on the forum. On the subject to hand its been a good winter especially compared to recent ones but not special, seeing as the winters of late have been so poor it has not taken much for it to be the coldest winter in 13 years.

But people are thinking for themselves. You think its a natural cycle, others think its man made, some of us like myself think it maybe a bit of both and in truth a fair amount of the population don’t give a stuff they have other things to worry about. We all find things in the media irritating, I hate the way that politicians are constantly let of the hook when trying to avoid giving a straight answer. Yes its a theory, but one that may have some credence given recent climate warming, Its like any scientific theory, you put forward your theory and make your projections based on that, and as of this time the theory seems plausible, that may change, I hope it does, I like my winters cold and I see huge implications of a rather unpleasant kind if AGW theory is correct. Like I say that may change, my biggest concern in regard to AGW theory is that the period of measurement is too small when viewed on the scale of the earths climate history and our records are sketchy beyond a couple of hundred years or so. Natural cycles do seem to drive our climate but the evidence for them comes from the same scientific community that believes that the earths climate is being influenced by man, consequently natural cycles are also a theory that’s difficult to quantify. Its really about interpreting the evidence that is available. It may be that we are in a natural warming cycle but do we have any more conclusive evidence that, that’s the case as compared to AGW theory, I don’t think we do, it more a case of believing what you want to believe. And lets face it the argument has been going on the climate thread for years, has anyone changed their point of view in all that time, I doubt it. The media of course will just put out what ever is sexier. AGW vs Natural cycles. The former appeals to the Dunkirk sprit, together we can beat this, we can get those men of the beach. As for the later, forget it the weathers going to just do its thing, the army cornered they will just have to put up with being prisoners. Sexy non sexy that’s the media for you.

Trouble is Delta the Natural cycle claims are also just claims and nothing else, only with less support from the scientific community than AGW. Frankly GW natural or man made, carry the same potential problems for our planet. Which ever side of the fence you sit, we either can't do anything about it or lack the collective will power to do anything about it regardless of media agendas.

The main point about AGW theory in relation to cold winters is that they will become less likely but not impossible, so really this is just repeating what we already know. curiously enough the same phenomena might also be true if we are in a natural warming cycle, also worth baring in mind that natural climate cycles can last many decades or more, so regardless of which side of the fence you sit on, it could well be that cold winters will be rare for a long while to come. No doubt somebody on NW knows exactly which cycle we are in and it has or is just about to end.

If this Feb can deliver the potential of the stratospheric warming then it could still go down as a memorable one, however as of this point of time and although being head and shoulders above recent winters, its been good but not spectacular. In truth those recent winters were so poor that beating them has not been hard, last year a case in point, despite living in the High Peak area at 187metres and living within 8 miles of Buxton traditionally one of the snowiest towns in Britain I did not see any snow in the winter months, only a dribble in November and another dribble in April. All in all I would say that if we are judging by the standards of post 1990 then not bad, pre 1990 then pretty average so far with time for that to change.

Sorry Nick I love you dearly but that’s just not the case, I lived in rural Norfolk in the 60s and 70s, I cannot remember having days off school, pupils and teachers came in from the all the local villages and if they couldn’t get in others covered for them, so the idea that people have to commute further is a red herring, besides less people had their own transport and car technology has improved for adverse weather conditions , Another factor is that most parents nowadays go out to work, so frequently it’s a case of sending children home to an unsupervised environment, because the parent/parents are out at work or the parent then has to miss a day of work to look after the kids. While the snow was bad in the SE it was not extreme in the manner of 62/62, 1947, 78/79, or 87. As I say none of our clients here has failed to get to work, and that includes Mike who lives on an untreated road but has managed to get to his school on the other side of Manchester, 15 to 20 miles away. The description of a moderately heavy snowfall as extreme is just plain stupid, almost as much as the labelling of nobodies as celebrities, in my opinion. Its not just the schools, we have no refuse collection either, what happens if we get a month of snowy weather are we just going to leave the rubbish in the streets to rot, you have to ask yourself are we a modern industrial nation or a third world backwater, its nor even that the snow came as a surprise.

Hi Fred They did walk and still could in many cases, as could the teachers. Our kids are off school for a second day yet the roads are clear for the most part, we have had some 3 inches a great deal of which has thawed, I can see no reason for the schools to have shut, other than as a chance to have a day off. Its amazing one of our clients is a deputy head at a school in Manchester he made it into work yesterday some 15 miles away but the local schools all closed for the day. I understand that 40 schools are shut in Somerset has it been very snowy there?. If we were to have several weeks of cold snowy weather what then, its one thing to suggest that we don’t have the infrastructure to cope, maybe we don’t but other than a few selected spots the falls of snow while fun have not been that bad. In 78/79 the snow lay in drifts 5 feet high, weather like that would bring the UK to its knees. Our winters have got less snowy and it might be that heavy falls remain rare but not impossible, without investment in infrastructure that might make it hard at times, but using a dribble as an excuse for a skive off work is just poor, and for the bulk of the country that’s been the case.

I don't have the hump or mission to prove anything to you, all that you have proved is debate with you seems pointless, you have made up your mind and all that you can do is offer cheap jibes, my English especially my grammar may be poor at times but I don't spout off rabid vitriol when short of debating skills, why is it down to me or SF to convince you, the scientific case has already been made by people far more able than I and as it has been in the public domain for a considerable time now I would guess that you are familiar with it even if you don’t agree so I ask you again where are your arguments not to mention your manners.

I think know what you are talking about, attempts to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, I would say that does this not demonstrate that to artificially tamper with the environment is fraught with danger, which is exactly what we have done by pumping at an un-natural rate vast amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, that have been stored in fossil fuels. and who is it that is saying that this plan is flawed, oh scientists, quite likely some of the same ones who think we are artificially heating the planet. So working to the theory that none of these scientists know what they are talking about and/or are involved in an elaborate plot to defraud the tax payer does it matter what they do. This is the problem with so many of these debates, cherry picking science, I believe them about such and such because it suits to do so but not about something else because it doesn’t.

I'm afraid you're argument is deeply flawed, while there may well be areas of the globe that would benefit from a warmer climate 1. they are already in the main the better off and 2. If it was to get so bad that large areas became un-inhabitable that would Cause large scale population movement, a well documented road to conflict. as well as a whole host of other problems including a link to the other big two cause's of conflict, religion and nationalism.

I'm sure there is plenty out there if you want to look but its seems to me that you have already made you're mind up, so you are likely to look at anything that opposes you're view point as flawed. I think it is now widely excepted even amongst sceptics that global temperatures have risen in line with predictions, it might be that they have levelled out, I think evidence for a fall is shaky for the moment at least, so what we are left with is a debate on whether the rise has been induced by our actions or from a natural fluctuation, The bulk of the scientific community think the former, I have to say I tend towards the feeling that they are right and I'm more likely to except their word without proof, than you're word without proof for obvious reasons, they at least have some solid reasons why they think as they do and they must have evidence to explain their theory’s, to the wider scientific community at large, you don’t seem to offer any evidence to the contrary, or any logical reason why they might just be making it up, or at lest in this thread you have failed to present it. I would also say if you want to be seen as a worthwhile person to have a debate with I would drop the derogatory comments about those who have a different view point, it is allegedly a free country (although that is debatable) and people deceive respect, something else along with snow that seems in short supply these days.

I think your post emphasises why it is impossible to have an intelligent debate about this subject on this forum, you accuse the, as you call it AGW mob, of certain negative techniques which you then mirror. Fact is most of us are cold weather funs, I am, TWS and SF to the best of my knowledge are, but we are concerned that it is likely that human activity is taking that pleasure away from us, no its not set in stone and I hope to god we are wrong, but I doubt it. They have talked about this being the heaviest snow in 18 years I would put that at 22 years, 87 was the last memorable winter spell I can remember, and I think this year needs to get better than it has been so far to measure up to that. As I said earlier it really has been great today, special in the manner that it has effected a large part of the country but not a spectacular snowfall IMO. Good post, I'm afraid we are stuck with the politicians, but I sympathize with your point and I too loathe the way that the rather ambiguous phrase of climate change, is trotted out every time a news worthy weather event takes place. Whatever the truth of GW is, I for one have seen no measurable increase in severe weather events because of it, that seems to be a complete red herring.

Spot on TWS, I would have thought the fact that this has been the most snow the SE has seen for 18 years suggests that these events are becoming rarer which is in line with AGW theory, in other words rarer but not impossible. Of course I hope that BLAST is right it would give me great pleasure to tell him so, however it would take a few years of consistent lowering of global temperatures to prove it. This year has been great especially the last couple of days, but so far it is not anything like those winters of my youth or those of the cherries of the 40s and 50s. For those who think its all a government plot, hogwash I'm afraid, I'm sure it would suit the government and their cronies in big business far more to say that everything is in fact, hunky dory, as the Republicans have done in the states. Even if you believe the case was unproven, which would be a fair place to stand, would you take the chance of doing nothing given the enormous implications of being wrong. Personally for me the risk is too great. If it turns out that the science has been wrong and that its all been a natural cycle then it will have still have been useful if it has helped us to lessen our impact on the environment, we are not the only creatures whose home this planet is.

I can confirm that C, we have had some thawing but fresh snow now coming down harder than at anytime over the last 24hrs.

Over An hour now of moderate to heavy snow still coming down

Very heavy snow here now, with no signs of a break in the clouds, gusty winds blowing the snow all over the place.

Is it "coming" our way