Comments on: Climate change predictions

By: Ways to Prevent Climate Modification

Ways to Prevent Climate Modification — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:06:54 +0000

[...] [...]

By: SimonC

SimonC — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:01:22 +0000

I *thought* my comments were measured enough not to attract any unreasonable criticism, but it seems not.

As I said in my first post, the recent cold weather could very easily be a weather blip, and nothing to do with climate at all. After all, there have been other blips like this every 20 years on average.

And to answer the point that "here's an new and convenient theory to answer the cold weather" the BBC horizon program I linked to was produced in 2003, so that's hardly a "new theory"

On balance, I think that man has influenced the climate and I think there is enough evidence that climate is changing and warming is quite strong.

But, I am very firmly against the "there is no argument" and the "the science is settled" stances that get trotted out every time someone disagrees with one prediction or report. Quit frankly, that kind of approach is guaranteed to get people's back up and make people question more, not less.

Ho humm. I hope that's not set the cat among the pidgins again…

By: JubileeClip

JubileeClip — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:57:26 +0000

Dead right. Its important to know how to define when "Global Warming" is no longer happening, because then we will know that the "Global Warming" taxes on flights etc have done their job and we can stop paying them. Can our Government, which imposed these taxes, give us the definition ? Surely, if they have sufficient information to justify levying taxes, they also have enough information to describe the circumstances the taxes are supposed to achieve ?

By: Stuart Fairney

Stuart Fairney — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:01:45 +0000

Yes, you are quite right, I was confuring my mean, median and mode.

By: Y Rhyfelwr Dewr

Y Rhyfelwr Dewr — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:50:28 +0000

It's not the doctorates that are the problem. It's the lies. The spin. The re-classification of journals that don't toe the party line. The "hide the decline." The "ice-free arctic." The "glacier-free Himalayas."

Doctors can tell porkies too.

By: BillyB

BillyB — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:02:23 +0000

too subtle for me too

By: BillyB

BillyB — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 23:58:29 +0000

It is comparing each year against a 30-year average (so justifiably tagged as "climate")… if we are experiencing local (UK) warming or cooling this would show up here over the years. If not there would be no predominant anomaly.

It was a handy graphical summary of 2009 weather that just happened to be within their climate pages.

The Met Office were (rashly) predicting "odds-on for a barbecue summer", yet from their own %ages, warmer than average was 50% which is only even-money. I think that maybe they'll be more careful with their wording in future, now their contract with the Beeb is up for review. Or perhaps they will stick to 24hr to 5-day forecasts.

By: BillyB

BillyB — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 23:44:54 +0000

not strictly true statistically – look up skewness

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:22:56 +0000

If a doctorate doesn't convince you that someone knows what they're talking about, nothing ever will. Of course you don't have to listen to them, but if I wanted to know something, I'd rather ask someone with a doctorate in the subject, than someone who didn't.

"we, the people, don’t have to listen anything anything anybody ever says. You warmists need to convince us"
How do we do that if you won't listen?

Just in case you still are listening, the difference between short-term weather and long-term climate is not difficult to grasp – weather is short-term, localised and changes quickly, whereas climate is long-term, global, and changes slowly. It's like a share price, which although it's rising on average over a year, may show signifcant variations.

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:00:09 +0000

"So if the whole globe cools (or even stays pretty much the same) for a period of, oh I don’t know, how about eleven years, then maybe the warmists might be wrong?"

Well for a start, the whole globe hasn't cooled or stayed pretty much the same – last decade was the warmest ever. Just because 1998 was the warmest year ever doesn't mean the trend isn't still upwards, which it is. 1998 was exceptionally warm, that's all.

And even if it had cooled or stayed the same over eleven years (which it hasn't) climate changes are measured over 30 years, not 11.