no climate change here there joking

[opalred]

 i have been now living in the north for 14 yrs

we used have 2  months of cold weather

so i built a fireplace in the house and bought a truck load of firewood

 then the cold went to 1mth the 2 weeks last year 1 week this year 1 day

last year was the hottest and driest i have seen

our dam dried up the wife had never seen that inhere 48yrs life

i believe this year people will be fighting over water

but there was a bright side

the white ants got a good feed and eat half the wood heap 

[kannot]

weather and  climate are 2  separate  things

[canuckamuck]

I built a fireplace this year too. I am using it right now.

But you are right that this was a mild winter and last year was a very strong drought.

But climate change cannot be detected by human recollection. The weather is different every year.  Always.

So enjoy the mild winter, and if your worried drill a well.

[onthesoi]

Quote

last year was the hottest and driest i have seen

 

Same for me, the autumn monsoon simply didn't happen. Never seen anything like it before in SEA!

 

MY money is on AGW and possibly El Nino effect!

[nisakiman]

Of course the climate is changing. It always has, and it always will. We've had ice ages, global tropics, mini ice ages, the medieval warm spell etc etc. That's the way this planet works.

 

The question is whether the minuscule amount (on a global scale) of carbon dioxide we are adding to the atmosphere is going to cause cataclysmic change to the climate patterns, which are anyway chaotic. The 'climate scientists' have really no more idea than you or I, whatever they may say. They simply don't have enough data, nor knowledge of the mechanisms at work.

[starky]

8 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

Same for me, the autumn monsoon simply didn't happen. Never seen anything like it before in SEA!

 

MY money is on AGW and possibly El Nino effect!

I thought we were in la Nina now

[onthesoi]

3 minutes ago, starky said:

I thought we were in la Nina now

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014–16_El_Niño_event

 

Edited February 4, 2017 by onthesoi

[chiang mai]

3 hours ago, nisakiman said:

Of course the climate is changing. It always has, and it always will. We've had ice ages, global tropics, mini ice ages, the medieval warm spell etc etc. That's the way this planet works.

 

The question is whether the minuscule amount (on a global scale) of carbon dioxide we are adding to the atmosphere is going to cause cataclysmic change to the climate patterns, which are anyway chaotic. The 'climate scientists' have really no more idea than you or I, whatever they may say. They simply don't have enough data, nor knowledge of the mechanisms at work.

You overate the knowledge of you and I and seriously underrate the knowledge of scientists.

[jerojero]

Of course the climate is changing. It always has, and it always will. We've had ice ages, global tropics, mini ice ages, the medieval warm spell etc etc. That's the way this planet works.
 
The question is whether the minuscule amount (on a global scale) of carbon dioxide we are adding to the atmosphere is going to cause cataclysmic change to the climate patterns, which are anyway chaotic. The 'climate scientists' have really no more idea than you or I, whatever they may say. They simply don't have enough data, nor knowledge of the mechanisms at work.

Yes hundreds of experts have got it wrong and have no idea. That time lapse aerial pictures of the Artic and Antarctic ice shrinking is an obvious hoax. Join Trump in blaming the Chinese and keep your head in the sand. Sheesh!

[starky]

17 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014–16_El_Niño_event

 

Yeah thats right. Did you read that? El Nino dissapated in June last year so were in La Nina...

[chiang mai]

I think there's something not quite right with climate change deniers. On the one hand they claim that science doesn't have the facts, knowledge, ability or talent to prove global warming and/or that it's man made. YET they, as laymen and casual observers, late comers to the subject matter if you will, appear to have the facts, knowledge, ability and talent to assure us the experts are wrong! Hmm, what's wrong with that picture I ask myself!!

 

If this were a simple case of one group believing a particular thoroughbred horse was better than another I would feel comfortable it was just a matter of opinion on something that was largely inconsequential. But the subject is potential of massive consequence and it's not just a case of differing opinions alone, the knowledge gap between the scientists and the masses is gargantuan.   

 

I see popular opinion of the climate change issue as being not dissimilar to other headlines of current times, a population that voted a billionaire real estate investor into the office of the President, a population that voted to shrink the economy by voting to leave the EU, the disenfranchised looking to stir things up and change the status quo. Wow, well you certainly will change the status quo if you're wrong on the climate change issue, do you play Russian roulette often!

[mesquite]

LOL!

[kannot]

6 hours ago, chiang mai said:

I think there's something not quite right with climate change deniers. On the one hand they claim that science doesn't have the facts, knowledge, ability or talent to prove global warming and/or that it's man made. YET they, as laymen and casual observers, late comers to the subject matter if you will, appear to have the facts, knowledge, ability and talent to assure us the experts are wrong! Hmm, what's wrong with that picture I ask myself!!

 

If this were a simple case of one group believing a particular thoroughbred horse was better than another I would feel comfortable it was just a matter of opinion on something that was largely inconsequential. But the subject is potential of massive consequence and it's not just a case of differing opinions alone, the knowledge gap between the scientists and the masses is gargantuan.   

 

I see popular opinion of the climate change issue as being not dissimilar to other headlines of current times, a population that voted a billionaire real estate investor into the office of the President, a population that voted to shrink the economy by voting to leave the EU, the disenfranchised looking to stir things up and change the status quo. Wow, well you certainly will change the status quo if you're wrong on the climate change issue, do you play Russian roulette often!

The  time  scale is miniscule even if  they went  back a  billion years, the Earths about 4  billion old I like this chart and when it was WAY WAY  hotter way way faster..............some of the biggest animals and plants  lived in those very hot times

[chiang mai]

Just now, kannot said:

The  time  scale is miniscule even if  they went  back a  billion years, the Earths about 4  billion old I like this chart and when it was WAY WAY  hotter way way faster..............some of the biggest animals and plants  lived in those very hot times

 

And, are you saying the scientists don't know that, if so you might want to tell them!

 

 

 

[kannot]

6 hours ago, chiang mai said:

I think there's something not quite right with climate change deniers. On the one hand they claim that science doesn't have the facts, knowledge, ability or talent to prove global warming and/or that it's man made. YET they, as laymen and casual observers, late comers to the subject matter if you will, appear to have the facts, knowledge, ability and talent to assure us the experts are wrong! Hmm, what's wrong with that picture I ask myself!!

 

If this were a simple case of one group believing a particular thoroughbred horse was better than another I would feel comfortable it was just a matter of opinion on something that was largely inconsequential. But the subject is potential of massive consequence and it's not just a case of differing opinions alone, the knowledge gap between the scientists and the masses is gargantuan.   

 

I see popular opinion of the climate change issue as being not dissimilar to other headlines of current times, a population that voted a billionaire real estate investor into the office of the President, a population that voted to shrink the economy by voting to leave the EU, the disenfranchised looking to stir things up and change the status quo. Wow, well you certainly will change the status quo if you're wrong on the climate change issue, do you play Russian roulette often!

Something else "everyone" was  once  looking  for but never  found

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

[kannot]

Just now, chiang mai said:

 

And, are you saying the scientists don't know that, if so you might want to tell them!

 

 

 

didnt say that at all did I ?otherwise surely i would have written "maybe scientists dont know about this" DID  I??

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, kannot said:

Something else "everyone" was  once  looking  for but never  found

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

It doesn't change my argument one jot, it's you (and others) versus the scientific world, excuse me if I don't bet on you regarding matters of science.

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, kannot said:

didnt say that at all did I ?otherwise surely i would have written "maybe scientists dont know about this" DID  I??

OK fair enough, then why did you post it?

[kannot]

1 minute ago, chiang mai said:

OK fair enough, then why did you post it?

Because its  been WAY WAY  hotter with much more Co2 than present for a WAY WAY  longer in the last half  billion years, in fact its been much hotter  for such a huge length of time compared to todays temps I find it rather odd that "now were doomed"

Half a billion years , todays temps are relatively  cool  looking at that history wouldnt you say? NOW  THATS A QUESTION for you, wouldnt you agree in the last half  billion years OVERALL its been MUCH  HOTTER with MUCH more Co2 regardless of the cause

[chiang mai]

1 minute ago, kannot said:

Because its  been WAY WAY  hotter with much more Co2 than present for a WAY WAY  longer in the last half  billion years, in fact its been much hotter  for such a huge length of time compared to todays temps I find it rather odd that "now were doomed"

Half a billion years , todays temps are relatively  cool  looking at that history wouldnt you say? NOW  THATS A QUESTION for you, wouldnt you agree in the last half  billion years OVERALL its been MUCH  HOTTER with MUCH more Co2 regardless of the cause

So you're saying that the noise being made today about global warming being man made is nonsense, you know more than the scientists do, that's cool! (no pun intended)

[kannot]

6 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

It doesn't change my argument one jot, it's you (and others) versus the scientific world, excuse me if I don't bet on you regarding matters of science.

For a long LONG time Luminiferous Aether was "the" explanation of  how light travelled until Relativity came along..............what if "they" are  barking up the wrong  tree like Luminiferous Aether and there is a  better but not yet understood or known solution?

[chiang mai]

Just now, kannot said:

For a long LONG time Luminiferous Aether was "the" explanation of  how light travelled until Relativity came along..............what if "they" are  barking up the wrong  tree like Luminiferous Aether and there is a  better but not yet understood or known solution?

Don't divert, that's not the discussion.

[kannot]

4 minutes ago, chiang mai said:

So you're saying that the noise being made today about global warming being man made is nonsense, you know more than the scientists do, that's cool! (no pun intended)

Do you agree its been way  hotter with way more Co2 for most of the last half  billion years than todays temps? it  looks  pretty clear to me, once again your'e  putting words into my mouth.

Edited February 5, 2017 by kannot

[kannot]

Just now, chiang mai said:

Don't divert, that's not the discussion.

BUT IT IS if they are barking up the wrong tree after all they spent hundred + years trying to find the Luminiferous Aether

[LongTimeLurker]

40 minutes ago, kannot said:

Something else "everyone" was  once  looking  for but never  found

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

WMDs in Iraq??

Edited February 5, 2017 by LongTimeLurker

[nisakiman]

What amuses me is the supporters of the current orthodoxy on climate change declaring that "The Science is Settled"; "There is Consensus"; "97% of Scientists agree" (which is actually BS, but leave that aside for now).

 

All those statements are the very antithesis of scientific method. Real science puts a theory (and climate change predictions are only that - unverifiable theory) out for open discussion. It doesn't try to shut down debate by labelling those that disagree as heretics.

 

In the 16th century, there was 'scientific consensus' that the Sun orbited the Earth. The science was settled. 97% of scientists agreed that yes, the Sun, beyond a shadow of a doubt, revolved around the Earth.

 

Galileo was labelled a heretic and a 'denier' for suggesting that in fact, the Earth was in orbit around the Sun.

 

Galileo's championing of heliocentrism and Copernicanism was controversial during his lifetime, when most subscribed to either geocentrism or the Tychonic system.[10] He met with opposition from astronomers, who doubted heliocentrism because of the absence of an observed stellar parallax.[10] The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture."[10][11][12] Galileo later defended his views in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which appeared to attack Pope Urban VIII and thus alienated him and the Jesuits, who had both supported Galileo up until this point.[10] He was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", and forced to recant. He spent the rest of his life under house arrest.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

 

Note the part "...formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture..."

 

AGW has become a religion for many, and the very idea that someone might disagree with their worldview gives them fits of the vapours. Hence the vitriol and cries of "Denier!", and the attempts to personally discredit them. 'Climate Change' has become a cult which has no tolerance for dissenters. Inconvenient facts are buried and tenuous possibilities declared fact.

 

This isn't science, it's religion.

[chiang mai]

1 hour ago, kannot said:

Do you agree its been way  hotter with way more Co2 for most of the last half  billion years than todays temps? it  looks  pretty clear to me, once again your'e  putting words into my mouth.

I don't know, I defer to experts for the answer to such questions, scientists and the like.

[chiang mai]

1 hour ago, kannot said:

BUT IT IS if they are barking up the wrong tree after all they spent hundred + years trying to find the Luminiferous Aether

Tell me, if you know that to be fact, why don't the cumulative brains who are studying this issue know also?

[kannot]

2 hours ago, chiang mai said:

Tell me, if you know that to be fact, why don't the cumulative brains who are studying this issue know also?

I dont know if its  fact or  not but "consensus" can be wrong, very wrong sometimes, which is  why I pointed out Luminiferous Aether as one example where "everyone" was  looking to find it and it simply wasnt there, they all jumped to the wrong conclusion.

 

[kannot]

2 hours ago, chiang mai said:

I don't know, I defer to experts for the answer to such questions, scientists and the like.

It doesnt take an expert to  look at that graph to see that temps have been way higher, way faster, way longer  than the current "shock story" also similar for Co2 a  virtual "demonized" gas now............hysterical, the graph shows it very clearly.