Jump to content
Thunder?
Local
Radar
Hot?
IGNORED

Update On Climate Gate


The PIT

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

But there was! Some baddies robbed information from a computer they had no right to and then some right wing ,oil agenda driven, bloggers fibbed and twisted it into a major story to try and give the science a bad name.

They deserve the media generated backlash that Karma says they're owed........Esp. with the record global temps at the moment showing how far we have messed with our climate (unless it's all the 'cold drivers' making it warm......lol).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

yeah but then we also got this news just in http://news.bbc.co.u...ech/8615789.stm whistling.gif

D'ya know bb ,even back in the old BBC days I'd told them that low solar activity meant more H.P. systems for us and colder winters and I was continually pooh, poohed. I'd gleaned the 'statistical info' from somewhere but could never remember where!!! High solar more L.P.'s over the U.K. , Low solar, More H.P. systems over the UK. Glad I've been vindicated after all this time!!! All the folk who used to be on the Beeb may remember me mooting such over the last solar min.

Like this winter though we may be cold but the majority of the world is toastie.

I've also heard it mooted that the UK will be least impacted by the ravages of AGW, being on the Atlantic coast, but this doesn't help me whilst we're getting drenched and Rekyavik is 72c and Europe is mid drought.........why can't it just shift 300 miles east????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

GW you can't say that. Warmists say there's no link between sun activity and the world climate.

Did the baddies nick the data or was left open for all by accident. There hasn't been any prosecutions by the plods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

GW you can't say that. Warmists say there's no link between sun activity and the world climate.

Did the baddies nick the data or was left open for all by accident. There hasn't been any prosecutions by the plods.

No Pit.

The science says that the amount of influence that the sun gives is piffling compared to the amount of heat that needs explaining and that ,to date, the only way to account for the extra heat is by using the human influence over the planet (land use change, hydrology and GHG's etc) not that "the sun has no impact".smile.gif

As the beeb article (and this past winter) shows us this a 'localised effect' that just blights small areas and does not impact global warming.

You could (well I do) go so far as to say it is a horrid way of milding the Arctic over winter (as we saw this past winter).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and heatwave
  • Location: Napton on the Hill Warwickshire 500ft

Apparently no wrong doing.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ech/8618024.stm

Lord Oxburgh is currently president of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables, thankfully his shares are safe whistling.gif .

Why not have an oil magnet in the chair , you couldn't make it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs

GW you can't say that. Warmists say there's no link between sun activity and the world climate.

Did the baddies nick the data or was left open for all by accident. There hasn't been any prosecutions by the plods.

Aye indeed they do PIT, beggars belief how some on here are so blinkered. Apologises to one or two pro AGW's on here who aren't so blinkered! biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey

Does anybody think it strange that so many Pro-AGWers were declaiming the hysteria of skeptics after the CRU leak, and now those self-safe pros, having been "vindicated", are lashing out with just as much hysteria at the skeptics?

As for the Sun...well, everybody here knows my views on that particular subject, but it's worth pointing out that the scientists who found a link between low solar activity and a colder CET have not described a fundamental mechanism for the effect... whistling.gif

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

Lord Oxburgh is currently president of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables, thankfully his shares are safe whistling.gif .

Why not have an oil magnet in the chair , you couldn't make it up

Well that was one of the problems with the enquiry. No sceptical scientists on-board. Then I suppose if there were sceptics on board they would never have been a report as there would never have been any agreement. :angry:

However the report did shift some of the blame onto the IPCC for misrepresenting the data which I feel is a bit crass to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

I think, C-Bob , when the jury's verdict is in is the right time to point fingers and not before.

Had the 'skeptics' kept 'hush' until today there would be no 'bullets' lying around to be fired off now would there?

For my part I plead human nature and being a bad example of a human being........work in progress kinda thing......but ,as Comic Book Guy once hollered at the moment of his death " I regret nothing......"biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

I'm surprised how hushed it has been over the reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey

I think, C-Bob , when the jury's verdict is in is the right time to point fingers and not before.

Had the 'skeptics' kept 'hush' until today there would be no 'bullets' lying around to be fired off now would there?

For my part I plead human nature and being a bad example of a human being........work in progress kinda thing......but ,as Comic Book Guy once hollered at the moment of his death " I regret nothing......"biggrin.gif

I'm not sure there's any need to point any fingers at all, but maybe that's just me...

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

No it's not just you Rob. quite agree there's no need to point fingers, now, or in any part of the climate debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest North Sea Snow Convection

I think, C-Bob , when the jury's verdict is in is the right time to point fingers and not before.

Had the 'skeptics' kept 'hush' until today there would be no 'bullets' lying around to be fired off now would there?

For my part I plead human nature and being a bad example of a human being........work in progress kinda thing......but ,as Comic Book Guy once hollered at the moment of his death " I regret nothing......"biggrin.gif

No-one should be pointing fingers. There is a difference between examining and testing theory and supposition, and cynical attempts to undermine scientific research without reasonable recourse. Maybe too many AGW proponents rather arrogantly have too much of a chip on their shoulder about having their scientific hypothesis and methodology questioned? It is a good job that an enquiry was launched in terms of the 'climate gate'. No sceptic should have 'hushed' as you put it. Without sceptics and questioning then the advance of the science is imperiled and risks advancing up a futile cul de sac.

Also, if , afterall, there is innocence in the research then why do people like you still up the ante in the wake of the outcome of the enquiry by speaking in terms of 'pointing fingers'? Afterall, if there is/was nothing to hide then there is no need for your side to point fingers is there?

Might be as well to start to see the difference between rigourous questioning to test the strength of scientific theory and methodology and deliberate attempts to provoke trouble in terms of bringing that theory down without any valid reason to do so. The initial doubts expressed by sceptics which have been acted upon in terms of the enquiry have served good purpose and in the light of the outcome should be univerasally welcomed whichever side of the scientific divide one comes from.

But additionally,worth remembering that just because the methodology of the research has not been found wanting in anyway in terms of the enquiry - it still does not prove AGW. It just means that the methods involved in researching the theory are innocent.

As a sceptic of AGW I am pleased at the result of the enquiry. But it doesn't validate any smugness on the part of any AGW proponents either, or critigue of finger pointing as some manifestation of point scoring because the sceptic calls for enquiry have been satisfied with no mal practice found attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Dorset
  • Location: Dorset

Being skeptical about the science is fine and that is what some people of NETW did when the allegations came to light.

However there were also a great many posts saying, how can we trust the scientists now, what a load of rubbish AGW is, we can't believe the temperature data sets any more etc etc.

A few people, and even few skeptics said, "wait on, lets see what the enquries finally find first before we start judging people".

Now both enquires have pretty much cleared CRU on science grounds.

The treatment of the scientists in question by certain skeptics was in the light of these finding not just tasteless and wrong but utterly unacceptable and dispicable. I see very few of these skeptics giving an apology.

By all means be skeptical of the science, but generally the attacks on the CRU where anything but being about good skeptical reviews of the science, that has been left to the inquires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted
  • Location: Heswall, Wirral
  • Weather Preferences: Summer: warm, humid, thundery. Winter: mild, stormy, some snow.
  • Location: Heswall, Wirral

I'd have to criticise AGW researchers if they genuinely thought the solar cycles had no influence of the climate.. afterall it is possible to have AGW and natural forcing, surely! I just think some expectations of AGW are perhaps overinflated!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

I think the media has a tendency to 'skew' certain areas of AGW unfairly weighting areas of our impact as though they are the be all and end all.

I feel when we compare 'human influence' to 'natural forces' our effects are small. Sadly, if the system is finely balanced in some areas this 'small' added extra is enough to upset that balance and bring about a domino effect across all of the other 'balanced systems.

If we look at GHG's in isolation we have had an impact over the past 150yrs but ,should we believe the literature, this is nothing when compared to what 'natural forces' can add to the system if our impacts lead the carbon cycle to it's 'warm climate' setting (permafrost melt, ocean sink failure, desertification/drying of lands)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Precisely. The global climate appears to have several quasi-stable states. Off the top of my head, I can list at least four: snowball Earth, Ice Age, temperate interglacial and hothouse. These respectively have: total ice cover, large ice caps, small ice caps, no ice caps. Currently we are in the temperate interglacial state. Any or all of the above climates (except maybe snowball Earth) are likely to be compatible with human life and advanced civilisation. The process of changing from one state to another is very likely to disrupt human civilisation and may even cause a complete breakdown back to hunter-gatherer levels.

As such, we really should do all we can to avoid pushing ourselves towards the tipping points that cause climate transitions. Since the details of these are unknown, extreme caution in adding or removing any particular forcing (e.g. GHGs, deforestation) is advisable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine, convective precipitation, snow, thunderstorms, "episodic" months.
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire

Precisely. The global climate appears to have several quasi-stable states. Off the top of my head, I can list at least four: snowball Earth, Ice Age, temperate interglacial and hothouse. These respectively have: total ice cover, large ice caps, small ice caps, no ice caps. Currently we are in the temperate interglacial state. Any or all of the above climates (except maybe snowball Earth) are likely to be compatible with human life and advanced civilisation. The process of changing from one state to another is very likely to disrupt human civilisation and may even cause a complete breakdown back to hunter-gatherer levels.

As such, we really should do all we can to avoid pushing ourselves towards the tipping points that cause climate transitions. Since the details of these are unknown, extreme caution in adding or removing any particular forcing (e.g. GHGs, deforestation) is advisable.

A very good post IMHO. I think we may well be at risk of "hastening our own demise" if we aren't careful, pushing the climate towards a kind of change that might happene anyway without human intervention- but tens/hundreds of thousands of years down the line. Or even generating a change of different sign (moving us into an additional warm phase instead of a straight descent into the next ice age).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...