Global Warming, eh?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:36 pm

Ben D wrote:
wintler2 wrote:
Ben D wrote:.. Because once there is an admission that 1998 is the warmest year on record, it follows logically that there has been no increase in global warming statistically for the last 14 years.


Nonsense. You are incapable of grasping the meaning of Trend, or of recognising your incapacity.


So if 1998 is the warmest year on record according to HADCRUT, does it not follow that according to HADCRUT, the warmest year on record is 1998, not any other year ever recorded.

What am I missing? :basicsmile


That the warmest year is unimportant compared to multidecadal trend.

But you are apparently quite incapable of understanding this.


Early on i asked about flooding in Brissy; now i here they're evacuating towns in n.nsw (not very far south), due to flooding.

In summer.

Same as last year, except 200 people drowned in last years.

It is lucky you are so expert on de Nile, you'll need those boating skills.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby wintler2 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:57 pm

Australian mining billionaire (and AGW denier) Gina Rheinhart buys stake in remnant centrist media.
She already bought a chunk of TV channel 10, is following and expanding on Monktons wishes..

Monkton's push for an Australia Fox News..
"It seems to me that devoting some time and effort to encouraging those that we know who are super-rich to invest in perhaps even establishing a new satellite news channel - not an expensive thing to do - and getting a few Jo Novas and Andrew Bolts to go on and commentate - but keep the news fair, straight and balanced as they do on Fox.

"That," Monckton said to an approving board room, would "break through and give to Australia a proper dose of free market thinking"...
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Ben D » Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:24 pm

wintler2 wrote:
Ben D wrote:What am I missing? :basicsmile

That the warmest year is unimportant compared to multidecadal trend.

But you are apparently quite incapable of understanding this.

Early on i asked about flooding in Brissy; now i here they're evacuating towns in n.nsw (not very far south), due to flooding.

In summer.

Same as last year, except 200 people drowned in last years.

It is lucky you are so expert on de Nile, you'll need those boating skills.

Ahhh, but I do understand, ..and who are you to determine for me, or anyone else for that matter, which statistics are more important or interesting.

If someone wants to say as a matter of fact, that 1998 is the hottest year on record, and there has been no higher yearly average temperature since then, it is a perfectly true unambiguous statement. And if someone were to do a graph of the last 14 years and establish a trend line for it, then that also is fine even though it would show a different trend than the last 14 years of the 130 year trend of 0.006 degree C/year. So long as everything is labeled correctly, and the raw data is valid, then anyone can graph whatever time period that is of interest to them.

As for your ongoing interest in 2011 flooding in my home town and the resulting death count of my fellow citizens, please understand that conflating extreme weather events, in this case caused by a very strong La Nina, with global climate is unsound science.
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby DrEvil » Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:14 am

Ben D wrote:So if 1998 is the warmest year on record according to HADCRUT, does it not follow that according to HADCRUT, the warmest year on record is 1998, not any other year ever recorded.

What am I missing? :basicsmile


this: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2011/

Here's a small soundbyte: "Nine of the ten warmest years are in the 21st century, the only exception being 1998, which was warmed by the strongest El Niño of the past century. ", which is of course one of those natural cycles that get taken out in the adjusted graph.

Also, look at the video here which sums things up pretty nicely:
http://www.urban-astronomer.com/Urban-A ... rsonrecord

As for catastrophic AGW, you're absolutely right that there is no definite evidence yet, but the climate models get better and more accurate over time, and every time a new IPPC report is released they conclude that the chances of something really bad happening has increased since last report.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3014
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Ben D » Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:08 am

DrEvil wrote:
Ben D wrote:So if 1998 is the warmest year on record according to HADCRUT, does it not follow that according to HADCRUT, the warmest year on record is 1998, not any other year ever recorded.

What am I missing? :basicsmile


this: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2011/

Here's a small soundbyte: "Nine of the ten warmest years are in the 21st century, the only exception being 1998, which was warmed by the strongest El Niño of the past century. ", which is of course one of those natural cycles that get taken out in the adjusted graph.

Also, look at the video here which sums things up pretty nicely:
http://www.urban-astronomer.com/Urban-A ... rsonrecord



As for catastrophic AGW, you're absolutely right that there is no definite evidence yet, but the climate models get better and more accurate over time, and every time a new IPPC report is released they conclude that the chances of something really bad happening has increased since last report.

Yes but the temperature trend is very small and constitutes only 0.006 degree C per year.

Btw, when you see some of the classic graphs of the 1880 to 2010 130 year period, the AGWers use almost a square shaped graph with time as the horizontal axis and temperature vertical. This results in an almost a 40 degree sharp slope upwards and gives the impression that the rate of increase of global temperature is very great. But once you factor in that the horizontal axis represents 130 years, while the vertical axis is about 1 degree C, the temperature increase is less than one degree,....over a 130 years. Since the planet in in an inter-glacial period, between ice ages if you will, a change in global temperature of only 0.8 degree C over a 130 years is in itself not that surprising to me when one looks at the vast global temperature range over very long periods.

Now back to graphs and trend lines, here is one of the HADCRUT graphs post by wintler2, notice the trend is cooling over the ten years 1998 - 2008.
Image

Now one year later using the 1999 - 2009 ten year period, the trend is warming.

Image

So you can see that it's only over long periods can a real trend be determined, and at the moment the trend that is not in dispute is a 0.006 degree C per year warming.

Now how's this for settled science of AGW, this is an email from Phil Jones, the head of CRU...
(note..you will have to do a page search to get to this specific email)

http://di2.nu/foia/foia2011/mail/4195.txt

[mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk]

From: Phil Jones

>Sent: 05 January 2009 16:18
>To: Johns, Tim; Folland, Chris
>Cc: Smith, Doug; Johns, Tim
>Subject: Re: FW: Temperatures in 2009
>
>
> Tim, Chris,

> I hope you're not right about the lack of warming lasting
> till about 2020.

. I'd rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office
> press release with Doug's paper that said something like -
> half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on
> record, 1998!
>
Still a way to go before 2014.

>


Now you see how much confidence the principals of planetary AGW projections have in their own computer climate models. Professor Jones 'hopes' the lack of continued warming in the first 10 years of the 21st century does not continue for another 10 years as some other principals of official AGW actually personally predict.

Now please note Wintler2 and company, Professor Jones acknowledges as it is common knowledge among the AGW insiders, that there was a lack of warming in the the first 10 years of the 21st century.

Now note the years of this email is 2009, and that another principal (Doug) of AGW had a press release that predicted within the 6 years from 2009 to 2014, there will be at least three new yearly average temperature records, ie. warmer than 1998, and each of the other two even higher then the previous record. Now we are in 2012 which means this year should be hotter than 1998, and 2013 hotter again and 2014 even hotter again.

Now since the year just passed, 2011, is said to be the ninth hottest year on record, and from your post we learn that 9 of the 10 warmest years were in the 21st century, we learn that 2011 was either the coolest or second coolest year of the 21st century.

So we can discuss this again this time next year to see how it is... :)
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:19 am

Inflexible Bendy wrote:
Iamwhomiam wrote:
You will burn in the hell you've helped to create while I rest at peace in the cool earth.

After applying Occam's razor to what seems a mostly incoherent rant about my lack of smarts, I see this as the underlying essential point you were trying to make.

You must understand that after reading your post, you reveal yourself to be, well,...angry and despairing about my perceived lack of faith in CAGW (C stands for catastrophic).

Btw, if I'm not mistaken, you admit to being inclined to the Buddhist faith, have you ever heard of the term Myalba

Quote:
Myalba (Tibet, Tibetan? In the Esoteric philosophy of Northern Buddhism, the name of our Earth, called Hell for those who reincarnate in it for punishment. Exoterically, Myalba is translated a Hell.

Funny that,..enjoy you rest here... :thumbsup


Thank you for answering one of my several questions. I do appreciate knowing that the C represents Catastrophic. You make that up yourself? It's ok if you did because it's fittingly appropriate.

Sad, really, that you still avoid answering my other simple questions. Sad also, that you find my words to be incoherent which, I suppose, is a big part of the problem.

I do not allow myself to get angry, but I do admit to allowing myself to feel some irritation. You know, like after a mosquito bite. Though, the mosquito cannot help itself. It creates irritation in other beings not through choice, but because that is its nature. You on the other hand do have a choice as to how you effect others and the world around you. Perhaps you're asleep (in the Buddhist sense) and doomed to remain in that state, at least in this life.

My comment about your burning in a hell of you own creation while I rest in peace in the cool earth would be the view of an agnostic with a Christian upbringing and is not in any way a Buddhist concept. Buddhists shed their attachment to their former corporal body upon death.

The hell I referred to was our increasingly heating world and considering you're much younger than I, I imagine that I will die before you, hence my reference to resting in the cool earth. You'll be around to experience a much warmer world than I will.

Myalba:
Bendy, I am truly sad for you. And again you're confused. You're confusing my existence here with yours. Are you familiar with what a tulku is? I am here by choice, my friend. I do hope you awaken soon.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6336
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Ben D » Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:34 am

Rory wrote:Bendie: I've got to laugh at the way you are fighting the good fight of the Kochs, oil barons and MIC, yet in complete denial about it, saying that wintler/iawia are the tools of tptb. It is a basic act of misdirection from someone who seems to be capable of little.


Oh Rory, I neglected to respond to this part of your post due to my considered opinion that it would provoke an unhappy situation with you and perhaps other members of the board. But on reflection I've decided to paint a quick thumb sketch of what I think, with the hope that it will resonate with those whose intuition is sensitive enough to apprehend, and not provoke an angry rebuke for those who think it is foolishness or worse.

The 'save the planet' theme that attracts so many activists and supporters of green, environmental, conservationist, ecological, heritage, human rights, etc., movements of the world imagine they are on the side of the goodies against the evil planet destroyers.

What they don't realize is that the whole conservation 'save the planet' agenda is run by the very ruling elite that they (eco activists, conservationists, etc.,.,) are railing against, ie... the faceless owner barons of the hated megapolluters, big oil, big pharm, etc..

They are the ruling elite, and they established the global green movements in the first instance as a decoy and subterfuge to get done what they want done...ultimately to depopulate the planet to an appropriate level of their calculation whereby they would be in the position to lord it over the ruled classes in a sustainable manner far into the future (think bloodlines/reincarnation/etc.).

For reasons which are not yet clear to me, of the people who fall for the deception of saving the planet and choose to do the bidding of the faceless initiator of the movements/egregores, many are very angry people and of course arrogant (I mean mere mortals saving a Deity,..Gaia). It's is if at some subconscious level, they have an innate desire to be in a position themselves whereby they could lord it over (and perhaps some even cruelly) we lessor beings, and sense the possibility/opportunity of realizing this passion by joining the conspiracy (unconsciously) by playing an active role in supporting the propaganda of the one world government presently in the making. These conspirators, the elite and their lower henchmen would have this planet become just one big zoo.... fat chance imho..
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Postby wintler2 » Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:38 am

Thankyou BenD, at last we have got to the basis of your faith.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re:

Postby Ben D » Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:48 am

wintler2 wrote:Thankyou BenD, at last we have got to the basis of your faith.

Not faith,.. just my present understanding!
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:54 am

I see you're moving backward again, Ben. You might want to read the report wintler2 provided, you know, the one that indicated "the two hottest years are 2009 and 2010." Remember, sleepy head, the one you told me: However on the suggested reading material, are you serious?

Have you forgotten the name of this site? Where's your rigor?
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6336
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:09 am

So, Bendy, which one are you really, Freddy, Charlie, Davey or Willie?

Willie! You must be Willie, right? The youngest and most misguided of all.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6336
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Ben D » Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:33 am

Iamwhomiam wrote:Bendy, I am truly sad for you. And again you're confused. You're confusing my existence here with yours. Are you familiar with what a tulku is? I am here by choice, my friend. I do hope you awaken soon.

Well at least no one can say you are a modest person whoever it really is behind the label 'Iamwhomiam'.

Honestly Iamwhomiam,, the content of my posts represent my present best attempts to share my understanding of the state of play concerning the global climate debate. There is nothing of substance in any of your posts that indicates to me that you actually understand what is being said to you. You don't seem capable of actually engaging with a detailed explanation or context of what you find right or wrong in my posts. Broad sweeping statements of my ignorance, or copying, pasting, making unsubstantiated statements about temperature records, distortions of what I conveyed, etc., does not permit me to engage with you in any constructive or meaningful manner so lets leave it at that, at least for now.

If you want to carry on with your nonsensical (to me at least) postings,... do it without me. namaste

A Buddhist saying to share....This is the World of Samsara, the cyclical world of suffering produced by the mind which clings to the objects of perception in a constant round of desire, ignorance and anger. As such it is a continuing distorted, confused view of reality which will and can only come to an end with the realization of nirvana. -



.
There is That which was not born, nor created, nor evolved. If it were not so, there would never be any refuge from being born, or created, or evolving. That is the end of suffering. That is God**.

** or Nirvana, Allah, Brahman, Tao, etc...
User avatar
Ben D
 
Posts: 2005
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Australia
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Sounder » Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:44 am

Thanks BenD

Given that the function of central authorities is to govern the mentality of the general population, there is no good reason to think that these folk have much interest at all in the truth of any matter. This is verified every day in too many ways to count where legitimate interests of the general community are discounted in favor of the wishes of institutional forces.

(The ‘Game’ is about the interaction of two basic forces, where one factor is dedicated to removing substance from form and a balancing factor is dedicated to adding substance to the form.)

It was learned long ago that the best way to control society is to impose a false imperative on that society. For the imposition to succeed it must be similar or easily derived from existing pretenses. The value of the imperative is found in the gap that is created between reality and normative perceptions of that reality. The gap creates anxiety where ones attempt to connect with authentic being is thwarted by the artificially created distance between it and social demands. This capacitance corresponds with cognitive dissonance and its extent represents the level of difficulty involved in integrating or at least better reconciling these two aspects of being.

This encourages the condition where most individuals grasp for transitional objects in a vain attempt to stuff the gap.

Collapse the gap, by adopting new assumptions as to the nature of reality, and many 'problems' will go away, or at least morph into a new class of problems.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Rory » Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:10 pm

Ben D wrote:Oh Rory, I neglected to respond to this part of your post due to my considered opinion that it would provoke an unhappy situation with you and perhaps other members of the board. But on reflection I've decided to paint a quick thumb sketch of what I think, with the hope that it will resonate with those whose intuition is sensitive enough to apprehend, and not provoke an angry rebuke for those who think it is foolishness or worse.

The 'save the planet' theme that attracts so many activists and supporters of green, environmental, conservationist, ecological, heritage, human rights, etc., movements of the world imagine they are on the side of the goodies against the evil planet destroyers.

What they don't realize is that the whole conservation 'save the planet' agenda is run by the very ruling elite that they (eco activists, conservationists, etc.,.,) are railing against, ie... the faceless owner barons of the hated megapolluters, big oil, big pharm, etc..

They are the ruling elite, and they established the global green movements in the first instance as a decoy and subterfuge to get done what they want done...ultimately to depopulate the planet to an appropriate level of their calculation whereby they would be in the position to lord it over the ruled classes in a sustainable manner far into the future (think bloodlines/reincarnation/etc.).

For reasons which are not yet clear to me, of the people who fall for the deception of saving the planet and choose to do the bidding of the faceless initiator of the movements/egregores, many are very angry people and of course arrogant (I mean mere mortals saving a Deity,..Gaia). It's is if at some subconscious level, they have an innate desire to be in a position themselves whereby they could lord it over (and perhaps some even cruelly) we lessor beings, and sense the possibility/opportunity of realizing this passion by joining the conspiracy (unconsciously) by playing an active role in supporting the propaganda of the one world government presently in the making. These conspirators, the elite and their lower henchmen would have this planet become just one big zoo.... fat chance imho..


Well, stone the flamin crows! I had thought you were one thing, but you're the other thing! Nice to know.

So; just to be straight on this, bendie:

Wintler and IAWIA are quoting actual peer reviewed scientific work in their assertions of a trend towards increasing temperatures world wide and the measured, correlation between this and man made pollution/emissions.

You are quoting kook smear articles from the oil barons (et all) and their Kock cronies to disagree. Because the science you disagree with is sourced from the oil barons (et all).. ..oh. I can see why you have neglected to outline your position before now.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/epubs/ndp/ushcn/u ... rface.html

This link will allow you to pull approx 117 years of precipitation and temperature data for a multitude of sites in the USA, measured each month at each station.
With a spreadsheet it is fairly straightforward to do your own research of trends. Interestingly, although not proof - only an indication, there is a measurable increase in temperatures at each of the stations. Try it and see for yourself. (precipitation also appears to be increasing at many stations - just though that was interesting observation)

Clearly temperatures are increasing - not absolute proof of AGW - but just proof of a measured trend. You did read this btw. http://news.yahoo.com/biggest-jump-ever ... 55211.html
This stuff is observable and with scientific methodologies, trends and outcomes can be predicted.

(think bloodlines/reincarnation/etc.)


When I saw that I had to say, well it was wrong of me to make any insulting remarks to you. Sorry. I hadn't realised I was dealing with the learning disabled.

I thought you were with the oil barons, corporate deniers etc.. In fact you were over the rainbow, dancing with the fairies, unicorns and 4th dimensional shape-shifting lizards - all with your head buried in a pile of Ike-poop. I won't be troubling you again :thumbsup

My suspicion on the game is that the big polluters, corporate MIC cats are going to try and keep doing what they do. Their government cronies have focus grouped that people are anxious/scared about the very real dangers of climate change and that the influential scientific community cannot but ignore the data - it's screaming 'man made' disaster on horizon (if no serious action taken).

The governments are merely doing as they always have: pay lip-service to something that they feel they have to for popular reasons, all while doing as they would have done anyway. Judge them by what they do, not by what they say.

Carbon tax is just their way of making money out of it, all while actually cutting environmental regulations and hamstringing the EPA.

So, in fact, it appears that the green community was born out of something positive, but has been co-oped or infiltrated into ineffectual dissipation of energy is more an indication of TPTB's typical game plan when something threatens their status quo. Happened with the anti-war movement, civil rights etc..

The data still shows the trends - they are still there - warming and because of mankinds pollution.

But I love how, such credible (4th dimensional shapeshifting lizards) witnesses such as Ike/Jones, dismiss it all out of hand because it must be the NWO crowd. And credulous fools dismiss actual science, not on any kind of logic basis, but because a conspiraloon for profit, like Ike says so.
Who is working towards the aims of TPTB again?
Rory
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby slimmouse » Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:29 pm

Well, I guess if Al "Ive-got- a -carbon-footprint- bigger- than- Nepal" Gore says its true, then who are we to argue. Hows that for an inconvenient truth ? I guess thats an exaggeration, but then again, he did start it.

I guess We should all follow his example.

It never ceases to further amaze me, how the Global warming ( or is that climate change these days ?) crowd seem happy to point the finger at , and assure us, that its big energy ( lets not forget the nuclear, electricity, Gas and Coal behemoths in all of this )that are happy to write endless cheques for their anti GW data, and yet suddenly speak of their disbelief at any suggestion that they wouldnt dream of doing at least as much if not much worse to suppress LENR technology or any exotic alternative, because thats all a figment of the imagination of quack inventors.

I wonder which is a bigger threat to their existence ?
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests