• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

One for BB & PJ: Cambridge Warmists Vs Skeptics

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    One for BB & PJ: Cambridge Warmists Vs Skeptics

    Surprised neither of them posted this already; maybe they both ignored it on the basis it doesn't support what they want to preach.

    I only read this overview: Would putting all the climate scientists in a room solve global warming... ? The Register

    Anyone read/seen more in-depth information about it?
    Originally posted by MaryPoppins
    I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
    Originally posted by vetran
    Urine is quite nourishing

    #2
    I don't bother reading The Register any more.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post
      I don't bother reading The Register any more.
      Thanks for your contribution
      Originally posted by MaryPoppins
      I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
      Originally posted by vetran
      Urine is quite nourishing

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by d000hg View Post
        Thanks for your contribution
        You are welcome.

        Comment


          #5
          Climate change could spark UK rail revival and tourism boom, research finds | Environment | guardian.co.uk

          Could climate change be a good thing? | Environment | guardian.co.uk




          £1000 fine for anyone NOT driving a 5 litre V8 4x4 I say

          Comment


            #6
            Skeptics? Nils Axel Morner? The dowsing guy?

            Ian Plimer? The underwater volcano guy?

            This is the best the 'sceptics' (And I will remove the quotes when they start behaving sceptically) can muster?

            Puh-leeze. BTW I see that BB mentor Anthony Watts has finally published a paper based on his volunteer project to assess the quality of US weather stations. To summarise, Mr Watts has demonstrated conclusively that poor station siting does matter. It tends to result in an underestimate of trends in the maximum daily temperature, and his co-author Dr Pielke asserts that these trends are the better indicator of general atmospheric trends.

            Oh dear.
            My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

            Comment


              #7
              It's a roasting 35 degrees centigrade in Buckinghamshire today. Phew!

              Still, it's melted most of the snow.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by pjclarke View Post

                Oh dear.
                So your official stance is that there are no credible scientists on the sceptical side at all? It sounded like the warmists don't agree amongst themselves and admit a lot of uncertainty.
                Originally posted by MaryPoppins
                I'd still not breastfeed a nazi
                Originally posted by vetran
                Urine is quite nourishing

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by d000hg View Post

                  Anyone read/seen more in-depth information about it?
                  I know a little bit about it.

                  The Yanks have a national temperature record, which is populated from data from surface stations. These are basically fancy thermometers dotted around the country.
                  Its the raw data from these that the warmists used to populate their graphs and scary models with. But everyone knows that a thermometer can give different readings, depending where it is placed, and everyone (or most people) are aware that cities are warmer than rural areas (this is know as the Urban Heat Island Effect - UHI).

                  Now Mr Watts was sceptical about the hockey stick graph so he decided to forget the models and look to see where the base data was coming from. He met instant opposition. Why ? and why hadnt the hockey stick people done this themselves ? after all, this is what science is all about. checking , rechecking, testing and retesting.

                  Noone knows why there was so much opposition. Why is pj so dismissive ?

                  no one knows.

                  Anways, the bottom line is that a lot of the surface stations started out in rural areas, but due to increased urbanisation they are smack bang in builtup areas now. Obviously they show increases in temperature over time
                  The people who own the surface stations started moving them to good locations when mr Watts highlighted their dodgy positioning - but they didnt tell anyone. Clearly a history of a surface station that has been moved must be suspect.

                  What the whole saga shows, is that the US temperature record is flakey, the science is not settled, and you cannot rely on the warmist side to try to be accurate and get down to the nitty gritty. In fact, they oppose and ridicule anyone who trys (see pj above)


                  Last edited by EternalOptimist; 14 May 2011, 12:12.
                  (\__/)
                  (>'.'<)
                  ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Look pj, I know this is an alien concept to you
                    I realise that you may not understand this, but I will spell it out anyway..


                    real scientists publish results even if they do not support their pet theories, real scientists have integrity and honour.

                    You are mocking mr watts for being a real scientist ??

                    maybe if he fiddled the figures, refused freedom of Information requests, produced dodgy graphs, and asked the taxpayer to subsidise him, you would find him a lot more palatable ??
                    you are a nasty piece of work.




                    (\__/)
                    (>'.'<)
                    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X