Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Global Warming. What do you expect to see in your lifetime?


Gray-Wolf

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.

problem is abns

 

thats how it looked

 

and there is an element of belief on BOTH sides

But surely believe with evidence, is better than with non at all....?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

But surely believe with evidence, is better than with non at all....?

 

But surely believe with evidence, is better than with non at all....?

 

not really

 

if you look at the here and now it brings up more questions than answers

 

the only things i see reported as fact show maybe or possibly

 

the only fact is c02 going up and there could be other factors causing that

 

also when we have future projections that get fooled by natural forcings such as nino and el nino

 

its very hard to take these as gospel

 

anyway i will leave you to it and will stick to the weather

Edited by john pike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

problem is abns

 

thats how it looked

 

and there is an element of belief on BOTH sides

Indeed there is, john. But, belief in things that are claimed to be unknowable and unverifiable, is not the same kind of belief as following the evidence. It's the openness given to new and novel evidence that renders all theories provisional...

 

I'm yet to come across a provisional religion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

nor does yours

 

please do not hint that people who question agw science as religious nuts

 

thankyou

 

Nor does mine what? My what? No need to thank me, as ABNS suggested, I didn't hint that people who question AGW are religious nuts.

 

If you'd care to question or debate certain aspects of climate change, then by all means, go aheadPosted Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.

not really

 

if you look at the here and now it brings up more questions than answers

 

Thays why scientist look at the past..

 

the only things i see reported as fact show maybe or possibly

 

Yes but with evidence..

 

the only fact is c02 going up and there could be other factors causing that

 

Correct, with evidence to back it up..

 

also when we have future projections that get fooled by natural forcings such as nino and el nino

 

Scientist are taking natural forcing into consideration, when they have evidence of it..

 

its very hard to take these as gospel

 

But the evidence can be taken more than gospel, than no evidence at all.. Not that the gospel is something to believe...

 

anyway i will leave you to it and will stick to the weather

 

ok.

Edited by Polar Maritime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

Nor does mine what? My what? No need to thank me, as ABNS suggested, I didn't hint that people who question AGW are religious nuts.

 

If you'd care to question or debate certain aspects of climate change, then by all means, go aheadPosted Image

 

then what was the point of your previous post

 

i have studied this for 15 years

 

i have qualifications in chemistry and physics

 

i have studied geology and climate for 15 years

 

and the reason i will not get involved with this is the sarcasm that comes

 

up on here. do anyone of you actually read the arguments against the science??

 

i am open minded and the science is far from proved either way

 

i will let you get on with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

then what was the point of your previous post

 

i have studied this for 15 years

 

i have qualifications in chemistry and physics

 

i have studied geology and climate for 15 years

 

and the reason i will not get involved with this is the sarcasm that comes

 

up on here. do anyone of you actually read the arguments against the science??

 

i am open minded and the science is far from proved either way

 

i will let you get on with it

 

The point was that some people don't believe the evidence based science due to their faith, which means they don't care what happens to the environment. Personally, I think it's sad that this still happens in modern times.

 

How do you mean that you've studied climate and geology for 15 years? Should that make a difference to the quality of your posts, or change how I perceive them?

 

If you take the time to read some of these threads, you'll see that most of what I post is dealing with the "arguments" from the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

The point was that some people don't believe the evidence based science due to their faith, which means they don't care what happens to the environment. Personally, I think it's sad that this still happens in modern times.

 

How do you mean that you've studied climate and geology for 15 years? Should that make a difference to the quality of your posts, or change how I perceive them?

 

If you take the time to read some of these threads, you'll see that most of what I post is dealing with the "arguments" from the other side.

fair enough but it looked a tad like you were saying all people who question this are like that

 

the reason i pointed out what i do is to show i am not stupid and have a fair idea myself

 

anyway its all off topic so i will leave it at that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

So , meanwhile back at the thread.....

 

I expect the issue with Water Vapour to be fully resolved, from what we know today we see water vapour and clouds as a positive forcing so i would expect that the various ways this forcing works will be shown to the point that nobody can try and hide behind it whilst denying all else?

 

I remember jethro bringing up water vapour many years back (just prior to the results of the Indian Ocean study which gave us our first answers to what the extra water vapour was doing) and still trying to push it as a 'great unknown' , great enough to question the rest of our predictions of how warming would manifest, even as the first evidence for 'changes' was amassing.

 

To date the evidence still goes to show that 'clouds' are helping speed up the warming and not 'reflect away' energy from the atmosphere but then past warmings should have hinted to the fact that 'eventually' the planet warms to the point climate can again become 'quasi stable' at that level of GHG forcing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

What can one say to this? How are we supposed to form beliefs except based on evidence? This is a science forum.

 

prime example this of why i do not bother posting here

 

cherry pick my post eh

 

typical

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

prime example this of why i do not bother posting here

 

cherry pick my post eh

 

typical

If you don't base your ideas on evidence, what do you base them on, John? I'm not taking the **** mate...Posted Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.
  • Location: Derbyshire Peak District South Pennines Middleton & Smerrill Tops 305m (1001ft) asl.

What can one say to this? How are we supposed to form beliefs except based on evidence? This is a science forum.

 

I think I have been misunderstood, I was just stating that a belief with some kind of evidence is better than just a belief alone, I agree we have to start somewhere.. I'm perfectly clear that this is a science forum. Science is based of evidence after all is it not ?

Edited by Polar Maritime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

I think I have been misunderstood, I was just stating that a belief with evidence is better than just a belief alone, I agree we have to start somewhere..

I think that we misunderstand each other quite a bit on here...We are all human, after all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)
  • Location: west croydon (near lombard)

If you don't base your ideas on evidence, what do you base them on, John? I'm not taking the **** mate...Posted Image

 

the problem with all this is nature can cause most

 

if not all the problems which are being shown

 

obviously man is adding to this but to say proof and evidence is being shown

 

by either side is misleading

 

problem here people are closed mind both sides so thats why there is so much bickering

 

anyway i will post a long post on the other thread later all nature based.

 

see what you think  of it and maybe a polite discussion Posted Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne

More of this. Mind I haven't got long to go.

 

Calgary floods spotlight cities' costly failure to plan for climate change

 

Municipalities not ready for rising number of severe weather events

 

Many Canadian cities and towns are ill-prepared for the rising frequency of catastrophic weather events like the southern Alberta floods, and it’s a problem that taxpayers will ultimately end up paying for, climate change experts say.

 

"There are other disasters waiting to happen in other parts of Canada, but Calgary is a good poster child for inaction on warnings they received not too long ago," said James P. Bruce, former Environment Canada assistant deputy minister.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2013/06/26/f-climate-change-flooding-weather-preparation.html

Edited by knocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...