|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 5, 2011 23:10:52 GMT 1
But the warmists haven't ANY evidence of human signal in climate change. What is the "weight" of zero evidence abacus? If you refuse to examine the evidence impartially and visit dodgy websites that are biased then you will never gain an accurate picture of what is occurring to our climate. You should also avoid taking seriously what people like marchesorosa try to con us into thinking because you will become further confused and misinformed. Have a look at this website which provides accurate scientific information about global warming: Website webshite, I live in the real world and have observational data going back 40 odd years and real experience of the "environment". CAGW is a crock. Fact. www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/Website webshite, I live in the real world and have observational data going back 40 odd years and real experience of the "environment". CAGW is a crock. Fact.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Jan 6, 2011 13:30:45 GMT 1
Mr Smith.
I have no doubt your observational data is correct. Well maybe some doubt as you once stated that temperature data was taken from your car dashboard display, but we will let that pass.
However, your data is for the little bit of the planet you inhabit. You seem to be assuming that because the sea is colder year on year where you are the trend is the same in the Indian ocean, or the South Atlantic. It ain't necessarily so.
My office is cold, but I work in quite a warm building. It would be insanity to assume data for the whole building based on my office.
Averages dear boy when applied to climate are global, not local. Local is weather.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Jan 6, 2011 16:53:47 GMT 1
I'm sorry rsmith7, but such data that you have must be of a limited nature and a personal interpretation. It would also appear that you have already made up your mind about this issue since you seem highly resistant to alternative viewpoints.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 7, 2011 2:53:25 GMT 1
"Please try to look at the more general picture", pleads abacus.
Not on this thread, ol' pal. This thread is about snow. Hadn't you noticed?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 7, 2011 11:35:19 GMT 1
Snow in Leeds again today! That has put a stop to my construction project for a while! Drat.
|
|
|
Post by helen on Jan 7, 2011 13:33:23 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Jan 7, 2011 13:56:27 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 12, 2011 12:29:01 GMT 1
Nearly 70% of the USA is covered in snowPosted on January 11, 2011 by Anthony Watts Meanwhile, New York City declares a weather emergency due to snow.Data from the National Weather Service National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center in Minnesota show that nearly 70% of the USA has snow cover. More here wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/11/nearly-70-of-the-usa-is-covered-in-snow/
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 12, 2011 12:35:37 GMT 1
Jay Currie says: January 11, 2011 at 10:49 pm Well, we have nearly a quarter inch here at the Southern tip of Vancouver Island…I blame “climate challenge” and, of course, Sarah Palin.
(I'm just thowing this in as a sop to my pet detractor. She has a thing about Ms Palin. As I have explained several times the only discernible attribute I have in common with Ms Palin is that at her age I, too, was very easy on the eye.)
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 28, 2011 16:16:07 GMT 1
Oh, don't you just love to stroll down climatology's Memory Lane? Snowfalls are now just a thing of the pastBy Charles Onians Monday, 20 March 20 www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.htmlThose were the days, eh? When warming really meant WARMING! Now the warmists are in disarray and simply any "unusual" weather is laid at GLOBAL WARMING's door including massive Northern hemisphere snowfall. And remember all those animals and fish that died of hyperthermia in Brazil not long ago? We have an infinitely elastic hypothesis that encompasses all eventualities. Nah!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 28, 2011 16:34:06 GMT 1
I've noticed several advertisements lately which I take to be a sign of the times - i.e a relaxation of the grip of the warmist ideology on advertising. they feature cold/bad/freezing weather.
The BT Winter Warmers ad which features a poor soul wrapped up warmly and buffetted by wind in a snowstorm.
The Fishermen's Friend ad which features an ice-breaker.
The Peugeot ad which exhorts us to "Be prepared for the rest of the Winter".
Where the adman goes can the public be far behind?
Has anyone else an example to report that might mirror this "Cooling" theme in advertising matter?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 28, 2011 16:47:42 GMT 1
Dan Lee on WU:WT says
"when we’re told that a “warming world means more snow”, we can now reply, “What warmth? Where exactly is all this heat that is supposed to be causing all this cold?”
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Jan 28, 2011 16:52:02 GMT 1
For Mr Smith
Barry Woods on WUWT writes
"a 30 year baseline is just a convention based on a classical understanding of climate. When there are observed 60 years cycles in the climate at some point the average is at the top of a cycle, bottom, or or a rising or falling trend thus creating anomalies that mean potentially nothing.
A 60 year base line or a hundred would be better, but still not ideal."
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 3, 2011 3:55:29 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Feb 3, 2011 4:05:08 GMT 1
wayne says: February 2, 2011 at 5:38 pm
"I would blame this on AGW but AGW was found dead under a twenty foot snow drift yesterday as MonthlyMeanTemperature fell below ThirtyYearRunningAverage. MonthlyMean and ThirtyYearRunning were found later unharmed."
|
|