Coldest morning of the year

bundah said :

dungfungus said :

I concede that you cannot offer any proof of global sea level rises then, so here’s a real easy question for you.
Why does the world need thousands of taxpayer funded expert “climate scientists” if they (almost) all agree with each other?

I’m in no position to prove anything in relation to the effects of climate change. I accept that the IPCC is the internationally accepted authority on CC and am happy to be guided by their analysis of all the scientific research.

I have nothing further to add and will accept the umpire’s decision…

Well, if you are happy to be subservient to a unelected / self appointed commitee then that is your right.
I suppose if the IPCC decreed that we should all go and live in caves on mountain tops you would happily oblige?
Anyone else out there have any photographic evidence that global sea levels have risen in the past 50 years?

dungfungus said :

I concede that you cannot offer any proof of global sea level rises then, so here’s a real easy question for you.
Why does the world need thousands of taxpayer funded expert “climate scientists” if they (almost) all agree with each other?

I’m in no position to prove anything in relation to the effects of climate change. I accept that the IPCC is the internationally accepted authority on CC and am happy to be guided by their analysis of all the scientific research.

I have nothing further to add and will accept the umpire’s decision…

I love the climate change debate, it’s the only debate where if you want to ask questions, your told the scientists said. If a scientist themself disagree, then their labeled a maverick. I’m always worried when I’m encouraged to just believe and don’t ask questions.

bundah said :

dungfungus said :

I have read the report on the link provided and I don’t find it compelling at all. It is just a summary of data to matched to selected projections to date (computer models of 300 “experts”) to confirm that if the projections of the same computer models actually come to fruition in the future then we are all doomed.
One point was made that global sea level has risen by about 8 inches since reliable record keeping began in 1880.
Where is the physical evidence? Photographs for example? Where are the details of the “reliable” records?
The report says further that the global sea level is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100 (this is not consistent with the average stated rise of 15.44mm per year since 1880.
Any report that relies on predictions with such wild outcome variations should be consigned to the round file immediately.
Alternatively, the report would make a great combinations and permutations excerise for students of mathematics (without computers).

So the non believers do not accept the evidence presented by 97% of climate scientists who say that there’s a 95% probability that humans are causing most of the global warming through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels which has and will continue to cause environmental damage.

Well they’re entitled to believe whatever they like but until they have scientifically researched the consequences and proven that 97% of scientists are barking up the wrong tree then their opinion is of no consequence 🙂

I concede that you cannot offer any proof of global sea level rises then, so here’s a real easy question for you.
Why does the world need thousands of taxpayer funded expert “climate scientists” if they (almost) all agree with each other?

dungfungus said :

I have read the report on the link provided and I don’t find it compelling at all. It is just a summary of data to matched to selected projections to date (computer models of 300 “experts”) to confirm that if the projections of the same computer models actually come to fruition in the future then we are all doomed.
One point was made that global sea level has risen by about 8 inches since reliable record keeping began in 1880.
Where is the physical evidence? Photographs for example? Where are the details of the “reliable” records?
The report says further that the global sea level is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100 (this is not consistent with the average stated rise of 15.44mm per year since 1880.
Any report that relies on predictions with such wild outcome variations should be consigned to the round file immediately.
Alternatively, the report would make a great combinations and permutations excerise for students of mathematics (without computers).

So the non believers do not accept the evidence presented by 97% of climate scientists who say that there’s a 95% probability that humans are causing most of the global warming through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels which has and will continue to cause environmental damage.

Well they’re entitled to believe whatever they like but until they have scientifically researched the consequences and proven that 97% of scientists are barking up the wrong tree then their opinion is of no consequence 🙂

I have read the report on the link provided and I don’t find it compelling at all. It is just a summary of data to matched to selected projections to date (computer models of 300 “experts”) to confirm that if the projections of the same computer models actually come to fruition in the future then we are all doomed.
One point was made that global sea level has risen by about 8 inches since reliable record keeping began in 1880.
Where is the physical evidence? Photographs for example? Where are the details of the “reliable” records?
The report says further that the global sea level is projected to rise another 1 to 4 feet by 2100 (this is not consistent with the average stated rise of 15.44mm per year since 1880.
Any report that relies on predictions with such wild outcome variations should be consigned to the round file immediately.
Alternatively, the report would make a great combinations and permutations excerise for students of mathematics (without computers).

dungfungus said :

To quote Dungfungus “the science on climate change may be settled but where is the evidence of the consequences claimed?”

This is compelling

http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/05/third-national-climate-assessment-evidence-impacts-warming-abound/

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

Jivrashia said :

I thought climate change was given?

Aren’t we coming out of the last ice-age, so the globe will generally be warming, polar ice will be melting, and sea will be rising in the foreseeable future?

The debate is whether the effect of global warming is ‘normal’ or accelerated/aggravated by humans, and whether carbon tax is just a money-grabbing exercise.

Did I get that right?

—–
That frosty morning seems to have been a one-off thing.
Hopefully the worst will hold off until Queens B’day.

Your proposal is more plausable that the of the alarmists.
The science peddled by the climate scientists may be settled but the evidence is yet to appear.

To quote Neil Degrasse Tyson “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe it”

To quote Dungfungus “the science on climate change may be settled but where is the evidence of the consequences claimed?”

dungfungus said :

Jivrashia said :

I thought climate change was given?

Aren’t we coming out of the last ice-age, so the globe will generally be warming, polar ice will be melting, and sea will be rising in the foreseeable future?

The debate is whether the effect of global warming is ‘normal’ or accelerated/aggravated by humans, and whether carbon tax is just a money-grabbing exercise.

Did I get that right?

—–
That frosty morning seems to have been a one-off thing.
Hopefully the worst will hold off until Queens B’day.

Your proposal is more plausable that the of the alarmists.
The science peddled by the climate scientists may be settled but the evidence is yet to appear.

To quote Neil Degrasse Tyson “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe it”

dungfungus said :

I see you respect my opinion but you don’t respect my person.

I don’t want you to get the wrong idea here. I don’t respect your opinion in this matter at all. Not one little bit.

What I respect is your right to have that opinion.

There is a big difference.

Jivrashia said :

I thought climate change was given?

Don’t recall anyone saying otherwise.

Jivrashia said :

Aren’t we coming out of the last ice-age

No. We’re currently 10~15 thousand years into the current interglacial which is part of the Quaternary glaciation Earth has experienced for the last 2.6 million years. I the natural course of things the Earth would enter another glacial period in the (geologically) near future. But, as James Hansen has pointed out, so long as there is some form of industrial society the Earth won’t go back into a glacial period; as the output of one CFC factory is enough to create enough radiative forcing to stop this from happening.

Jivrashia said :

so the globe will generally be warming, polar ice will be melting, and sea will be rising in the foreseeable future?

Correct.

Jivrashia said :

I thought climate change was given?

Aren’t we coming out of the last ice-age, so the globe will generally be warming, polar ice will be melting, and sea will be rising in the foreseeable future?

The debate is whether the effect of global warming is ‘normal’ or accelerated/aggravated by humans, and whether carbon tax is just a money-grabbing exercise.

Did I get that right?

—–
That frosty morning seems to have been a one-off thing.
Hopefully the worst will hold off until Queens B’day.

Your proposal is more plausable that the of the alarmists.
The science peddled by the climate scientists may be settled but the evidence is yet to appear.

p1 said :

dungfungus said :

…..and no warming for the past 17 years……

dungfungus said :

Someone has to challenge the alarmists.

Challenged is one word.

I know that; your point is?

dungfungus said :

I don’t know why you try and marry science to politics either – please explain this.

Because the vast majority of idiots who deny the climate change science also tend to link it to some sort of left wing plot.

And yes I deliberately used the term idiot. Anyone who tries to deny the absolute masses of evidence is an idiot.

That is not to say that they are not entitled to their opinion. People are entitled to any opinion they like…but when that opinion flies in the face of all evidence then they are an idiot.

It would be like someone saying ” Well I’ve never been to Beijing so therefore I don’t believe it exists”. They are entitled to hold the opinion, but they are definitely an idiot for having it.

Where is the evidence that sea levels are rising?
I see you respect my opinion but you don’t respect my person.

I thought climate change was given?

Aren’t we coming out of the last ice-age, so the globe will generally be warming, polar ice will be melting, and sea will be rising in the foreseeable future?

The debate is whether the effect of global warming is ‘normal’ or accelerated/aggravated by humans, and whether carbon tax is just a money-grabbing exercise.

Did I get that right?

—–
That frosty morning seems to have been a one-off thing.
Hopefully the worst will hold off until Queens B’day.

dungfungus said :

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

I don’t know why anyone would bother. If you don’t understand by now, you’re unlikely to accept the science with another explanation. Some people died believing the earth was flat and circled the sun. All the evidence otherwise they refused to accept. Climate change deniers are the latest to display their ignorance of science.

Who were the people who died circling the sun while believing the earth was flat?
The “science” of climate change has yet to present any evidence of sea levels rising at catastrophic rates etc.

Okay, I shouldn’t write before I have eaten breakfast. Let me reword that. ‘Some people went to their graves still believing the earth was flat and the sun circled the earth.’

dungfungus said :

…..and no warming for the past 17 years……

dungfungus said :

Someone has to challenge the alarmists.

Challenged is one word.

bundah said :

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

If nothing else Dungers is predictable…

Thanks for the compliment. Someone has to challenge the alarmists.

Maya123 said :

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

I don’t know why anyone would bother. If you don’t understand by now, you’re unlikely to accept the science with another explanation. Some people died believing the earth was flat and circled the sun. All the evidence otherwise they refused to accept. Climate change deniers are the latest to display their ignorance of science.

Who were the people who died circling the sun while believing the earth was flat?
The “science” of climate change has yet to present any evidence of sea levels rising at catastrophic rates etc.

bigfeet said :

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

Why bother explaining? The science is there and it is unequivocal.

Science is neither ‘right-wing’ nor ‘left-wing’. It just is. And whether you choose to believe in it or not makes not one bit of difference to the data.

Data used in climate change alarmist theory is input only. The outcomes are totally different as evidenced by our coldest Autumn day in 31 years and no warming for the past 17 years.
I don’t know why you try and marry science to politics either – please explain this.

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

FFS, learn the difference between weather and climate…

Unbelievable.

Maya123 said :

Some people died believing the earth was flat and circled the sun. All the evidence otherwise they refused to accept.

Ahhhh… The earth does circle the sun…..

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

Why bother explaining? The science is there and it is unequivocal.

Science is neither ‘right-wing’ nor ‘left-wing’. It just is. And whether you choose to believe in it or not makes not one bit of difference to the data.

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

If nothing else Dungers is predictable…

dungfungus said :

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.

I don’t know why anyone would bother. If you don’t understand by now, you’re unlikely to accept the science with another explanation. Some people died believing the earth was flat and circled the sun. All the evidence otherwise they refused to accept. Climate change deniers are the latest to display their ignorance of science.

Well, the coldest Autumn morning for 31 years – and it’s official – BOM on ABC no less!
I am not holding my breath waiting to hear explanations from the few climate warming alarmists left out there.