Hot and Moist

[SpontaneousOrder]

Always thought the scientific rationale behind climate change was pretty convincing but it's facts that should matter most and there seem to be so many contradictions, with each side accusing the other of rigging figures, it's hard to know what to think anymore.

Pity mankind is so irrational, even things that should be science get turned into religion in all but name. Bring on the mass extinction and the resultant emergence of slugs as the world's dominant creature. Sensible little creatures, slugs are.

I don't think it's religion so much as it is academics & scientists, predominately funded by the public sector, choosing not to 'kill the golden goose' that allows them to travel the world and do research instead of picking up dead-end teaching jobs when their funding runs out.

At least that's what many of the scientist are saying now that they are retiring and less worried about committing career suicide. Although I guess the greens - where change == human and therefore == bad - are more religious & less practical about it. They'd happily sacrifice a thousand human lives to save a single polar bear.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Why pick those parameters? Reminds me of priests cherry picking parts of the bible. I bet whatever conclusion you attempt to draw, I can cherry pick other data to show the opposite.

Its all just random nonsense.

Because those parameters prove that PJs point is nonsense when viewed in the wider context.

[EternalOptimist]

It's a horrible corner the greenies have painted themselves into, and it 's a horrible mind-set.
Any good news that comes along makes them extremely unhappy. New ways to attack malaria - they get depressed, storms on the decline - they get depressed, temperatures flat lining - they get depressed. Polar bear numbers soaring - they get depressed.

I often wonder if bad news actually makes them happy. If so, it's a sick cult they belong to

[pjclarke]

Interesting to look back further than the last 100 years (an absurdly short, although convenient for promulgators of hysteria, time period to draw any conclusions from).

Like, lets say, 1766 to now. Pick the top 20 annual rainfalls. Plot a graph. What does it look like?

We only have good rainfall data for the whole UK back to around 1910. However, for temperature we have the Central England series, which is the longest continuous instrumental series anywhere in the world, and looks like this:

[pjclarke]

I don't think it's religion so much as it is academics & scientists, predominately funded by the public sector.

Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago - Scientific American

[SpontaneousOrder]

We only have good rainfall data for the whole UK back to around 1910. However, for temperature we have the Central England series, which is the longest continuous instrumental series anywhere in the world, and looks like this:

What's temperature got to do with the point at hand?

And as far as rainfall is concerned, if we only have 'good' data back to 1910, then that's not enough data to be statistically meaningful, given the context of increased CO2 as a cause.

So we're left with:

There is not enough good data to support the idea that rainfall is increasing significantly due to CO2

and...

If we were to include the less that perfect data, then we would conclude that there is no significantly increased volume of rainfall

[pjclarke]

What's temperature got to do with the point at hand?

And as far as rainfall is concerned, if we only have 'good' data back to 1910, then that's not enough data to be statistically meaningful, given the context of increased CO2 as a cause.

So we're left with:



and...

That's correct. Far as I know the UK rainfall data shows no significant trend. Temperatures do, however

[BrilloPad]

Because those parameters prove that PJs point is nonsense when viewed in the wider context.

I bet whatever conclusion you attempt to draw, I can cherry pick other data to show the opposite.

Or I will pick a different context.....

[pjclarke]

I bet whatever conclusion you attempt to draw, I can cherry pick other data to show the opposite.

Or I will pick a different context.....

I refer you to the thread title.

[BrilloPad]

I refer you to the thread title.

I thought you were referring to NLYUK.