|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 30, 2012 13:23:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 30, 2012 13:27:43 GMT 1
But they still claim the CO2 effect is stronger than solar. We'll see!
|
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Jan 30, 2012 21:07:17 GMT 1
So what if the sun does cool over the next decade or so? The important effects of AGW are measured over many decades / centuries. If the sun goes through a cool spell now it only means that when it (inevitably) warms again the effects of AGW will be worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 30, 2012 21:29:32 GMT 1
So what if the sun does cool over the next decade or so? The important effects of AGW are measured over many decades / centuries. If the sun goes through a cool spell now it only means that when it (inevitably) warms again the effects of AGW will be worse. No "the important effects of AGW" are measured over 30 years. The warmists can't shut up about the paltry, disputed temperature rise "in the latter half of the 20th century. Just because the last fifteen years don't suit your agenda, you can't move the goalposts. |
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 31, 2012 11:05:25 GMT 1
Translation of the Met Office response into non-climatologyspeak FROM FOXGOOSE ON BISHOP HILL
"Please don't look at the temperature record, which shows no significant warming since 1998. Consider instead the fact that is has got about half a degree warmer in the past 150 years and our colleagues at IPCC have a theory that it might start getting a lot warmer soon - unless it gets a bit colder first of course. (Bear in mind also that all of us here depend on churning out this garbage for our living)."
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 31, 2012 11:10:06 GMT 1
Bu...bu...but, nick, the supposed correlation between atmospheric Co2 rise and temperature in the last quarter of the 20th century was hailed by alarmists as the infallible proof of their hypothesis.
Now they suddenly want to to tell us that cooling is also a sign of warming (not to mention snow). I don't think so.
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 31, 2012 11:13:18 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 31, 2012 11:22:23 GMT 1
Lucky for the warming crowd that both the record lows AND the record highs are consistent with AGW theory.
|
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Feb 1, 2012 15:49:09 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by mak2 on Feb 1, 2012 16:23:58 GMT 1
The Met Office say it is misleading but they don't say that it is wrong!
|
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Feb 1, 2012 20:03:43 GMT 1
No scientist says the that the relationship between CO2 and AGW is infallible, just very probable. Have you learnt nothing about science in the last few years on these boards? We've been over this countless times before.
No scientist has claimed that CO2 is the only driver of climate change. It just happens to be (almost certainly) the main driver in the last few decades. If the sun went into a cool period, of course that will have an effect but once it reverts to a warm phase (which it will) the full effects of CO2 in our atmosphere will become apparent.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Feb 1, 2012 20:05:24 GMT 1
Have to say I'm rather flattered by the "youthful". Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Feb 2, 2012 1:31:07 GMT 1
No scientist says the that the relationship between CO2 and AGW is infallible, just very probable. Have you learnt nothing about science in the last few years on these boards? We've been over this countless times before. No scientist has claimed that CO2 is the only driver of climate change. It just happens to be (almost certainly) the main driver in the last few decades. If the sun went into a cool period, of course that will have an effect but once it reverts to a warm phase (which it will) the full effects of CO2 in our atmosphere will become apparent. So now you're saying the sun is causing the cooling??? Only last year, this notion was laughed at by you zealots. Had your crib sheet updated? |
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Feb 6, 2012 17:49:26 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 6, 2012 18:08:50 GMT 1
"Little sign of the acceleration in warming that most models had predicted" James Annan. He was the one who lost the bet with David Whitehouse.
Looks like "acceleration" should be dropped from the alarmist lexicon.
|
|
