I apologise for not posting very much over the last week. I have been somewhat preoccupied with my trip to Indonesia. I am leaving next Thursday for 10 days.
I am not sure whether I will have good internet access while I am away. I will be visiting Buyat Bay in North Sulawesi. This is the place where mining giant Newmont is accused of dumping mine waste which some claim poisoned the local fishing village and coral reef.
I have of course, prepared for trips before without slowing down with the blog postings, but I shall admit to finding some of the discussion here a little bit repetitive of late.
Perhaps, I am also slightly taken a back by the extent to which public discussion on environmental issues in Australia is now so totally dominated by global warming hysteria. Of course, this is not always the case at this blog.
But I do find it quite extraordinary, for example, that the Australian government is going to get involved in forestry issues in Indonesia, not because of the intrinsic value of these forests, but to “save the world” from climate change.
I did enjoyed watching the expression change on the face of this journalist as she interviewed climate change sceptic Professor Ian Plimer:
Professor Ian Plimer, a geologist from Adelaide University, is apparently unaware that there is a “consensus” amongst scientists on climate change.
Anyway, the number of blog postings from me might slow down a little for the next little while.
I invite readers and commentator to send me in potential guest posts. Make sure the text is self explanatory and include relevant links. Readers also like wildlife photographs, and its best if the photographs are already in jpg format and a suitable size for the blog.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Re Plimer’s interview by a mere slip of a lass. I didn’t see any expression change – she knew he was anti before he got on from the intro.
Well let’s count the predictable porkies:
Throw to the past – solar, orbits, continents – yep no problems there but fog it with the present.
“all these features have been ignored” – no they haven’t.
“we know the sun is driving the current change” yea ? how that’s Ian ?
The water vapour is the major GHG line. Sigh.
And confusing fluxes of CO2 with the balance.
Then the teensy weensy argument. (Schiller would be proud).
He left our cosmocrapology and cooling since 1998 so gets marked down for that.
He got one plus mark for the baby joke.
So 6/10 for representing the contrarian position with the usuals.
And why is he keen on mucking around with geothermal if we have heaps of coal. Emit with pride Ian ! Perhaps it was because it had to do with things geological.
Seems that cranky old geologists feel left out of the climate debate. There’s so many protesting.
Yawn. Next !!!
Hello Luke,
You might want to google Milankovic, he was the scientist who put together the irregularities in the earth’s orbit and rotation and identified the cycle time over which these irregularities repeat themselves. This period is 100,000 years, and is known as the Milankovic cycles.
Then google Vostok Ice Core.
This is the ice core drilled in the Antarctic, with a record spanning about 430,000 years of earth history re temperature and atmospheric CO2 content. The graphs of CO2 and temperature show clear upward spikes coinciding with the Milankovic cycles. Al Gore briefly referred to the Milankovic cycles in his movie, but he forgot to include a discussion of the ice core data, which was shown at the bottom of his diagram.
The interesting fact is that analysis of the timings of temperature spikes and CO2 spikes shows that temperature increase leads CO2 increase by about 1200 years. That is, temperature is driving CO2, not CO2 driving temperature.
So Prog Plimer is right.
You’ve just got to love the way throughout the interview the video continued to show catastrophic weather, smoking chimmneys, crashing ice and all the other images of doom they love. The anthropogenic climate warmers just never give up with their nonsense.
Read a bit of geology Luke and you might not be so sceptical as to what it can tell us about climate change.
Jennifer,
the looming federal election will produce a veritable firestorm of apocalyptic scenarios from the ALP – global warming and industrial relations. The unions have a massive war chest and will throw everything at the election – it is make or break for them. If the ALP lose the unions will be sunk forever as WorkChoices is “bedded in”.
Goobers – yes I know all about Milankovitch cycles actually and have no problem with it. We’ve discussed the CO2 leading business here at length Dan so do try to keep up. Only a week or two ago. What you get is not inconsistent at all.
Anyway the serious CO2/climate paleo story is here http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7135/full/nature05699.html
29 March 2007.
So overall Plimer wouldn’t have a clue !! And is not even up to date in his own field. He should stick to his rocks.
P.S. Gore is an irrelevant sideline to the serious debate.
Luke; On a scale of 1 to 10 how good are you?
11 out of 10 for arrogance.
Not many “converts” to be gained with your know-it-all attitude!
Gee chrisl – I’m mortally wounded. Nobody gets converted here. But you can afford to be arrogant if you’re right.
Many younger science-workers seem to have lost the plot. And we have developed a syndrome that I call THE TYRRANY OF THE STATISTICIANS.
Its as though few of the young guys are natural philosophers any more. And most of them rather seem to be part of a power-play or an endemic condition of hubris on the part of a statistics-guy-101 priesthood.
I don’t know who to blame so I might blame Popper today and Lakotas tommorrow.
But to take one very lame tool and make-believe this tool is the very essence of science is a very strange thing.
Thats why its always good to see a REAL scientist lke Ian Plimer in action.
Field Workers are not field marshalls. And science workers are no scientists. And a statistician is no science and just gets in the way unless he’s working for the man and not running things.
>>>>>>>>
Hope your security is good Doctor.
No Luke, being arrogant isn’t being right. Your’e in top company though.
Stalin Mao all the other Leftist clowns who were “right” were arrogant, so too Hitler, good ol’ Musso. You are in top comnpany.
Don’t forget the lessons of history old bean. They won the first battles but lost the war. and they were wrong as well.
Its interesting to see the number of TOP scientist who claim their articles to the InterPlanetary Council of Crooks were altered.
Maybe I’m wrong, being arrogant pays by the look of things.
Why is it Luke that EcoMarxists like yourself can deride the work of E-G Beck because he used “inaccurate data”(my emphasis) yet you willingly accept a temperature differential based on technically defective methods??.
Personally I accept the globe is cooling and will continue to cool. What are you going to claim then?? That you were responsible for the cooling and mini Ice-Age. Please I’m waiting for you to pull a worthless observation from where ever but just remember YOU have NO scientific proof of any Global Warming. Just Observations, fraud and publicly funded gimmicks.
Luke STOP THE EVIDENCE FILIBUSTER.
Do you have any evidence or not. Give us the evidence or stop the implied-lying and just admit I am right and you are wrong.
Jennifer says “I shall admit to finding some of the discussion here a little bit repetitive of late” But IMO Jennifer appears to let the wild ones run for effect. In the early days the internet chat room monitor would abruptly terminate anyone who flamed an individual or the topic hosts.
Then our host says “Perhaps, I am also slightly taken a back by the extent to which public discussion on environmental issues in Australia is now so totally dominated by global warming hysteria”
I say the media can’t be blamed for that Jennifer because too many ordinary passers by are alarmed by their own observations. Out veteran farmers in the main are no exception on that score.
Just watched it.
The effect of the sun on global warming has been ignored?
That’s plain untrue – it’s been well and truly addressed and debated.
And why the enthusiasm for hot rocks if anthropogenic CO2 is making virtually no difference?
There are some valid , worthwhile dissident arguments which many on the AGW side dismiss for pure ideological reasons and do so much damage to their supposedly scientific credentials.
But there’s not much here which is truly damaging to the majority position.
NevKook and Dickybird – are you guys for real?
BirdBrain – I gave the evidence in many previous posts. Try reading it. I know it’s hard. But try a few paragraphs every night.
Kooky – try reading what you’re saying. “You have no proof of global warming – just observations”. Wow crazy logic man. Imagine in a court “Well your honour apart from the observations of the man stealing the car we have no proof” WTF !!!!
Kooks read the archives here – I have listed plenty of observations and evidence of AGW.
And we’re talking multiple lines of evidence not just weather stations.
As for Beck – it’s simply an irrelevance – measurements of things non-representative. It has zero relevance to the debate.
I’m starting to dig this EcoMarxist thing though – I may need to read up on it. I gonna get the full uniform, Mao cap, a red flag – the works. You’ve convinced me.
Anyway – are you guys paid actors – come on surely you’re not for real. Did Rog put you up to this. I can imagine someone like Schiller or Louis actually exists but you guys are off the meter. ROFTL. What gimps.
A number of TOP (gee capitals) scientists hey. Gee whiz. LMAO !!!
And GoofyBird I can see you’re from the telegaphy era. “Luke STOP THE EVIDENCE FILIBUSTER.”
Perhaps this means “Luke. The evidence filibuster”
or “Luke” “Stop the evidence” “Filibuster”
so yes I’ll stop the evidence given it disturbs you.
and “implied lying” – so does that mean you’re not sure if I’m lying. OK – I’m not. Trust me.
Try blogging without the beers.
Sorry Luke – I should have read the comments first before commenting.
I read Jen’s post and hopped right in.
I’ve now read them.
I think you made the same points I did so forgive the repetition everyone!
No problemo Jim.
Lets see some evidence Luke. Always remember that you are a leftist idiot engaged in an evidence filibuster.
What a moron you are. When your case has been totally disproved.
I wasn’t looking for you to lie LUKE and PRETEND that you had shown up with some evidence. We were looking for the actual evidence.
You may have thought that what we wanted was you lying and alleging that you had already presented us with this evidence.
But in fact what we wanted was the ACTUAL evidence itself.
So what we have proved here is that Luke is a fraud. He has no evidence whatsoever. He keeps on throwing this trick of linking to a pay-per-view site. He will not explain what the evidence is in his own words.
Now third parties. As low as low low filth that Luke is he is not alone. And in fact you will find that TOO A MAN every last one of these energy-deprivation-fascists are engaged in the exact same evidence filibuster as what we see Luke engaging in right here.
No amount of attempting to get these guys to come up with the evidence with stop them continuing this filibuster.
This is why also the leftist prohibition that is called Godwins law. This is why the insane prohibition on “meta-comments” this also is why people are branded as “trolls”. Its all part of commie-filth like Luke never having to come up with a skerrit of evidence.
I myself aren’t too fussy. I don’t even want GOOD evidence. Just some evidence would be okay.
Meanwhile, in the real world, with real climate, and real weather events, AGW theories continue to become more insipid and insignificant.
Another massive winter blast has hit the US in mid April, with heavy snow from Colorado to Michigan to Maine. Chicago has just had alltime one day snowfall of 2.9″ for April beating beating prev. April record of 2.3″ set in 1957.
Oh, but it is only anothe freak weather event!
Sid – I never thought I’d be glad to see you.
Rog’s cousins have found the blog. I told Rog to lock the gate but he doesn’t listen. Rog are rabies and Tassy Devil facial disease related.
And fascinating that DickyBird would raise Godwin’s law when he’s a walking exponent of it.
Anyway GooneyBird I WANT GOOD EVIDENCE FROM YOU THAT THE EVIDENCE I HAVE POSTED IN THIS BLOG (in the ArChIvEs) IS WRONG. (Gee feels powerful using caps lock – doesn’t it, and you can play a tune going up and down).
Tell me when you’re ready.
P.S. Meanwhile I’ve found your video site on the web – it’s excellent – here .. .. ..
Lets see some evidence Luke you pathetic little pussy.
At the risk of sounding repetitive:
Perhaps the reason why discussion is getting stale is because of your insistence that what is happening is ‘hysteria’, and insistence on sticking to the science and one-track scepticism of the science.
Perhaps you could move on and have more discussion of the policy responses being suggested and what is good and bad about them, instead of being stuck in this science denial rut.
We are less than a year out from a federal election in which new climate policies are going to be flying thick and fast, and many of them will be aimed at maximum media and greenwash rather than effectiveness or efficiency, e.g. the foreign forest policy and the ban on incandescent lightbulbs.
If now is not the time to switch focus for a while onto policy responses rather than the science, then i don’t know when will be a better time.
IF you were Prime Minister Jen, what would be your response to the ‘global warming hysteria’? and why?
Right then Steve.
That means that you must have some evidence.
Well lets see it then.
Of course Steve is being ridiculous. And the real reason things are and will continue to be repetitive is that Steve is a liar. He doesn’t have the evidence. He will continue to dodge the need for evidence.
And therefore the rest of us will attempt to get Steve to give us some evidence and Steve will shirk this and filibuster and try a few tricks to distract us.
And so around and around it will go in endless repetition until Steve gives us the evidence or stops lying and admits the entire energy-deprivation crusade is a malevolent fraud.
SO HAVE YOU GOT THAT EVIDENCE STEVE?
Steve,
Thanks for your comment.
But, I’m not sure that there can be rational policy responses given Al Gore has successfully turned global warming into a moral issue. I once heard morality described as a strange reconstruction of our fears and aspirations.
It’s not hard to see why the birdy has been banned from nearly any blog he has posted on. All squawking and pecking, and not much else.
I think Steve’s point is correct. It would be more interesting to see more on adaption and mitigation, policy responses, that kind of stuff. The same denialists, repeating the same stuff that has already been debunked time after time is entertaining, but adds nothing to the scientific debate.
Jen,
I think Al Gore’s importance to the debate has been a little overstated by the anti-AGW crowd. Polls (if they are correct) show a majority of people are concerned about climate change and want some kind of action. Only a tiny minority of Australia’s population have seen Al Gore’s film. I really think it’s time to look to the future, and not at doco made by a politician a few years ago.
“It would be more interesting to see more on adaption and mitigation, policy responses, that kind of stuff. The same denialists, repeating the same stuff that has already been debunked time after time is entertaining, but adds nothing to the scientific debate.”
Nexus you idiot.
This means you must have some evidence.
Or it would if you weren’t a lunatic.
Okay.
So where is your evidence.
GO!!!!!!!!!
MITIGATION AGAINST WHAT NEXUS????
Mitigation means spending money. And with you energy-deprivation-crusaders it means first stealing the money to spend it. Or otherwise pushing costs onto people?
FOR WHAT REASON.
Stop the filibuster you guys. You are not getting away with it anymore.
So we can say without doubt that the alarmists on this site are all lunatics and have no evidence whatsoever.
I’ve proved that case totally.
Nexus & Jen – I don’t think most people are reacting to Gore – it’s a temporary headline celebrity blip – public are doing a long haul integration of many newspaper articles, TV shows and personal observation of many changes. People have been watching this issue for a long time now.
The problem is how much change people can take/want. I’m not convinced they hae contemplated what’s required.
Nexi – I reckon Graeme is doing an excellent job or representing your denialist looney fringe. Sort of Clockwork Orange style of blogging – refreshing but stupid. Sort of like Motty but with no brains and impulse control.
We might have to sedate him though to impart any notion of evidence.
I think BirdBrain has not read the blog rules.
OK Goofybird here it is – no pay for view.
You WANT evidence.
We WANT your detailed critique of:
(and warning – any b/s that’s all lies or such means you lose big time – this is your big test sunshine)
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM13apr07.pdf
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/
Good grief the bloke is blind.
Q/Where is the proof that CO2 causes warming.
A/ there is none. pure theory and hype.
why??
because the original figures (data) was fiddled with to suit the aspirations of the “diddler”
Thats the truth about AGW. Its a criminal scam!!
Now laden with parasites of all types.
Luke, you will have a link to pull out of your… what was Callender looking at back in the 30’s??
what had him alarmed??
how is that you are quite ready to accept fiddled data on CO2, and quite ready to accept temperature data that is demonstrably erroneous,(instrumentation and human error) yet cannot see that a reconstruction of CO2 levels by a man far more intelligent than you is pointing to CO2 not being an issue??
Fact. if you transpose Economic recessions and the depression on “global warming” and CO2 there is NO SIGNAL. Yet, because economic conditions determine the output of CO2 you would expect to see some input. Do you see any????
Spare us the b/s NiftyKev – give us some facts. You have no basis for saying the temp data is erroneous – where is there a systematic bias in the data – in any case there’s more than one live of evidence so it’s really irrelevant.
Not even your hardest core denialists would doubt that the greenhouse effect exists.
How is the data fiddled on CO2? Baseless b/s.
You see Nev-boy – easy to say all this – much more difficult to mount a serious argument. As Doofus-bird is finding out – he’s got nothing but abuse. No substance.
So you’ve simply offered up bluster. How about some serious argument?
P.S. Just remember if you argue that all these data sets are wrong logically you have also no logigal basis for saying it’s cooling. Same data sets !! You can’t have it both ways. You would to conclude that we simply know nothing. Think about it 🙂
So you’ve got four links. And what specific hypothethis do you think they are evidence four?
You started off posting pay per view as a distracrtion. But the fact is you haven’t changed your fraudster modus operandi.
So that you can be accountable for what you are saying you have to state precisely what hypothethis you think you have evidence for and hone in on the relevant page number.
Its like on my blog where you posted all these totally irrelevant book-length pdf’s and didn’t say what it was you were claiming to amass evidence for.
So the fact is you are just trying to do the Lambert thing, the energy-deprivation tactic par excellence, which is to post any old links and do a runner in order to distract third-parties.
But what we really wanted was evidence. Evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming or for the idea that a little bit of warming is a BAD thing in a brutal and pulverising ice age.
Right. So those are your links. Well you really don’t have a stitch of evidence at all. There is no evidence for catastrophic warming in the Stern report or in any IPCC material whatsoever.
You are losing ground here quickly fella.
So you can’t answer the question eh? Because you can’t. You’ve never read them. You never will.
YOu’re a psycho nitwit.
You got nuttin’ mate ! Or should we say BeNice.
Quite a little net troll aren’t we. With no ideas.
Just the same old same old story on each site.
Interesting that CO2 and cheap energy seems to have been no use to Australia’s drought stricken farmers.
So tell us Carmel – what will cause the world to soon enter into a pulversing (ooooo – wsoooo cold) ice age. Like how?
No we weren’t after you throwing it back on me.
I’m basically here to prove that you have no evidence whatsoever or to drag that evidence out of you. I’ve proved the first but have been unsuccessful in the second.
BadBird – you ain’t here to get evidence – you’re just here to troll.
Well Carmel I can’t help it if you don’t have any information to share. You’ve been provided today with a mountain of info but poor little Carmel can’t read. He/she or it can only threaten. Oh well so sad.
All you do is troll around saying the same boring stuff. Trying varying the theme. Although it did occur to me you might be a bot. Are you a bot BeNice ! Perhaps we could give you the Blade Runner cooked dog test?
Graeme,
I can play that game too.
Black is white. You can’t prove that it isn’t, can you? I am here to make you deny that it’s so. Go on. You haven’t got a thing, have you? I thought so.
Don’t be silly SIT. This is no game. We are not throwing around any (David) Hume-nuke here. That is to say we aren’t setting up some philosophical/skeptical bar to jump over and then putting the bar up impossibly high.
I was just after some evidence.
And I don’t think thats too much to ask.
It doesn’t have to be particularly good evidence. Just lets see some evidence. We have seen ANY yet.
Of course black is not white and any technically savvy person knows that a spectrophotometer would prove so.
So the story so far:
Australia’s only 2nd worst serial troll/possibly carbon-based life-form enters stage right (of course). Well he/she/it would never enter stage left.
Appears to be some holocaust denying Nazi type.
Genetically related to Schiller as a sub-species in that he/she/it uses eco-marxist as much as “the” and “and”; and also no sense of humour. A dour bastard.
Big on the biffo like Motty, but essentialy devoid of any intelligence, no impulse control and suffering uncontrolled Tourette’s syndrome.
Perversely seems to have spent early days reading about leftist philosophy – surprising drops more lefty names and concepts than Rog. Possibility it may be a Rog cousin or failed genetic experiment with a Wollemi pine, a goat, a Tasmanian Devil and some ordinary household bleach in Rog’s greenhouse.
Early efforts to communicate with the beast result have resulted in bitten fingers, facial lacerations and powder burns. Have taken rabies vaccine and tetanus shots.
Apparently it cannot read so there is no possibility of reasoning with it. It has no capacity to integrate new information and has a singular mode of operation that responds with ” GIMME evidence. SHOW me. GIMME. GIMME. SHOW ME. I’m gonna beat you to a pulp etc”
Carmel would fail the Turing test as an intelligent being. Maybe a uni AI project gone bad – possibly a “bot”, but don’t think so.
Conclusion: essentially a anti-AGW genetic experiment gone horribly wrong.
A classic rightist CO2 smotherer who wants to poison people with excess CO2. I mean dead and decaying things emit CO2 – yukky. And wants to accelerate climate changing and make Australia a total desert. All the extra CO2 will make woody weeds go berserk cutting out light to the sun and destroying all life.
Basically a CO2 smothering ice-age causing drought inducer. Classic farming family killer. A destroyer of rural towns.
Doesn’t get much worse. Nasty stuff. Fancy wanting to cause an ice age – what a mongrel.
Recommend mandatory detention and/or termination of the experiment.
Rog
that’s not proof, I said I want PROOF!
bot class blog luke; it sure aint science
used to be fun in the sun downunder hey
See BOT here
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%9C%E3%83%83%E3%83%88
On reflection Luke: Behavioural standards associated with say wiki contributions from the many various sources are missing. This repetitious crap will destroy Jen’s popular blog discussion eventually.
I think the discussion will destroy the discussion eventually. Or perhaps that should be lack of discussion?
The story so far.
We’ve proved beyond any doubt that, by their own demonstration, alarmists, even if they are science workers, do not have much in the way of evidence for their evil attempts at cost imposition and global energy deprivation. Their efforts have already led to countless deaths, of the sort impossible to ascertain on the individual level.
If we put the evidence bar charitably low then still none of their stuff can jump over it.
And to be very sure of this. Sure enough to start imposing costs on people. We need something more then just evidence.
We need rightful certitude. But how do we go about getting that?………..
Now thats very strange isn’t it? I mean that they don’t have any evidence these alarmists. Very strange.
I mean right now a lot of reasonable people here are probably thinking its just Luke. Luke is the lunatic and this guy Graeme is taking too much of an extremist point of view THE OTHER WAY.
Right now reasonable people who have followed the flow of things since I showed up have probably been influenced a tad by what I’ve done here. Not a great deal but a little bit. But they are still basically thinking of me in the same way as Luke.
Like you’ve got one leftist extremist and then a right-wing extremist. And there will be reasonable people here thinking to themselves “A POX ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES”
And thats understandable.
But the problem is this.
Its not just Luke.
Its every scientist (science worker) that takes this point of view. There is not one science-worker, no matter how prominent, who believes that drastic action is necessary, who has anything approaching reasonable supporting evidence for this contention.
And most of them are pretty hopeless scientists when all is said and done. Or totally lost outside of their narrow specialty.
An exception is Lovelock. But he’s been let down by his younger contemporaries. Sad really. Because he’d been kicking goals for so long and now he’s been caught out by his appalling colleagues, most of whom are half his age.
So all this leads to a question:
WHATS GONE WRONG WITH SCIENCE IN THE 21ST CENTURY????
Over the next few days I’ll be attempting to write the beginnings of an answer to this important question over at my blog.
But we had a question above that I can answer right now.
“We need rightful certitude. But how do we go about getting that?”
Fortunately the answer to this is ready to hand. We get rightful certitude from one source and one source only:
http://graemebird.wordpress.com/2006/05/03/deductive-bivalent-exactitude-versus-rightful-certitude/
The story so far;
nasty mouse king has been ruling his little band of mouse/mice without too much trouble; he displays consumate energy, doesnt sleep and walks around mousetraps.
Enter the nutcracker….
“Their efforts have already led to countless deaths, of the sort impossible to ascertain on the individual level”
hmmm
The folks just watching this thread need only ask a simple question before reading further down into that bird crap from above.
Is the world’s population going up or down? as a result of “their” efforts.
He’s your cousin Rog – it’s OK. I’m sorry for you. The guy is a brainless foul-mouthed extremist who doesn’t want to listen. Do you think any serious scientist is going to engage an imbecile like that? The guy is a serial troll that’s been banned from half the blogs in Aussie.
You see it’s interesting that he has also surmised my position on greenhouse action. He doesn’t even know what it is.
“banned from half the blogs in Aussie”
Oh?
Figure of speech, of course
Thats an idiot inference gavin.
A totally moronic inference. And if you are a science-worker on the public tit you ought to be fired immediately for incompetence.
You ARE a science worker aren’t you gavin? There’s plenty of dumb science-workers around.
But my goodness what a totally idiotic inference.
The world population is still increasing. Now we might hypothesise some influence or other that is killing many millions of people.
However gavin, being an idiot, reckons that can’t be happening, this influence can’t exist… Because population growth is still increasing.
I swear. I could set traps all around town. And I’d never catch anyone quite as stupid as gavin.
You ARE a PHD science-worker though aren’t you gavin?
Because a normal person wouldn’t be caught dead saying anything THIS transparently idiotic.
Gookybird – you’re a simply a filthy CO2 smothering marketer of death. Your actions are condemning Australia to an eternity of drought. Your actions have already killed more Australian farmers than Hitler. Mate you have to be stopped. It’s scum like you that are ruining the country and now you want to turn it into an ice age. You low mongrel.
I WANT PROOF OF AN ICE AGE !!! SHOW ME or you’re a right wing stinking idiot. Actually you’re an idiot anyway. Don’t bother trying to prove it coz you’re wrong anyway. As a matter of fact you’ve been wrong since being born. Every day.
Luke, But the amount of rain falling on Australia has increased overall in recent years with global warming, check the BOM site or the archives at this blog.
Jennifer
the rain is no use to us in the South East. It’s like saying more rain in Italy is useful to those in Poland.
Analysis of the increase seems to indicate it is an artifact of the pollution in South East Asia. When that issue is finally addressed, the increase in the North West will go too.
This demand for proof is meaningless.
Absolute proof exists only in math and logic. You run into a dash of bother when you try to “prove” something absolutely in science. You may “prove” something empirically (i.e. by repeating and confirming an observation) but this is not absolute proof in that you can never make all possible observations (i.e. in all time and all space). You may “prove” something deductively (i.e. by applying logic ab initio) but this is not absolute proof since your starting principles may be wrong (i.e. our understanding of the physical laws may be flawed).
WRT to the climate debate, all you can therefore have is hypotheses and theories. But never “proof”. Nothing has been proven – the interactions between CO2, the sun, water-vapour, clouds / albedo, cosmic rays, the ENSO, PDO etc in the past can at best be only guessed at. And we demand “proof” of something that is based on a future interaction of these?
All that can be provided is one (or a sequence of) observation(s) or worse, a statistical analysis of a subset of observations, and use these as a (typically) non sequitur “proof”.
To stimulate a bit of discussion:
The climate models as a consequence can not “prove” anything. In this graph,
http://www.ipcc.ch/present/graphics/2001wg1/large/05.02.jpg
we see how poorly the “prediction” climate models “postdict” the past. The ~0.2C rise from 1800 to 1950 with a ~0.1C dip to 1975, bears no resemblance to observations.
If we look at the detail of how well the models simulate the 20th Century,
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/figspm-4.htm
we see that in the period after 1940 (that is acknowledged to have the most active sun in the last 8000 years),
http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20041028/index.html
the natural global temperatures (i.e. WITHOUT the increased anthropogenic CO2) are simulated to have declined. (And I’m ignoring the fact that this simulation bears no resemblance to the previous one in that it shows a ~0.6C and not a ~0.2C rise in temps!).
Is this the proof on the basis of which we should dismantle the western way of life?
Is this not a reason why Ian Pilmer is entitled to be a little skeptical of the model driven consensus?
cheers
Arnost
I think we have some use for the rain in the South East fella?
But focus on what hypothesis you are attempting to shore up/rip down.
On this planet the cold times are the dry times. And the warm times are the wetter times.
But CO2 has not yet been shown to affect any of those things substantially. What it does do though is make the plants more able to cope with drought.
So SJT, whatever you are on about you appear to be quite confused.
I can’t believe that Jennifer has questioned Luke about rainfall, but has been tolerating the vulgarity, disrespect and high number of posts that GraemeBird has been delivering. Oh that’s right, it’s Luke we’re talking about here and trying our best to kneecap him at every possibility, so of course the obvious will happen.
Fancy all this behaviour going on in a thread about being bored of the repetition. The one person who can actually change that is the blog master, and yet she seems to want to sit back in her Colosseum and open the gates. Jennifer you are not the only one being bored.
Ha Jen – but we’re now in Graeme Bird space time. As Warwick Hughes, Motty and Dicky-bird have shown we reject all establishment science measurements. The scientists are on the take. They’re idiots. And they’re leftist idiots. We can only go by gut feel and experience which is never wrong. So that graph is just what they want you to think. But ha ha ha ha. We’re onto their little game. The newspapers show by pictures of dead sheep we’re in drought and that’s the true story. We have to protect the nation from CO2 smotherers and energy-wasters. CO2 – the product of decay and death. CO2 – the grazier’s enemy – powerful woodland thickening agent – a potent grass killer. CO2 has killed more C4 grasses than Hitler. I hope Schiller is happy.
P.S. Almost had an illogical thought – if we don’t trust the surface measurements to show it’s warming how will we know it’s cooling.
Ha ha ha – almost tricked you. Everyone knows that thermometers are always accurate in reverse and that there are no averaging problems in cooling calculations. Pretty bloody tricky eh. Trust noone but Dodo Bird – he is the true messiah of denialists.
Yeah for sure. If the birdbrain posts contradicted Jen she’d be censoring the birdcrap outta them like she’s done to us and others before. That bird hasn’t landed far from the nest though so the Bird Big leaves it be.
The scales are heavily tilted with Jen’s fist leaning heavily on one end. Hence serious punters rarely bother with Jen’s blog these days, hence she finds it as repetitive & uninspiring as do the others who aren’t embroiled in personal arguments.
“Big Bird…birdbrain…censoring the birdcrap outta them….repetitive & uninspiring..”
Pinxii thinks she is a “serious piunter”
BOM forecast above normal June quarter falls in SE Qld & northeast NSW
http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/ahead/20070326R.shtml
Pinxi writes:
>…as do the others who aren’t embroiled in personal arguments.
Rog writes:
>Pinxii thinks she is a “serious piunter” (With an inaccurate quote to boot).
Point made loud and clear.
Luke: Jennifer’s latest comment on things down under remains in the graeme class – weak as piss
Front Page headline in the National Capital today – “Tougher water limits looming” by Graham Downie.
Is this guy a man of substance? Check it out for yourselves! I go into it nearly every day.
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=environment&story_id=575950&category=environment
For folks that are interested imho CT above has slightly more influence in the region than its sub group with “Land” that’s hardly ever quoted on the water issue.
Luke, I actually think you set the mood with your initial comments, see the above thread … Graeme Bird came in only a little more over the top and a little later.
Yea sure Jen – whatever !
Just a “widdle more” over the top. Think your infra red repellant glasses have turned opaque to anything but redneck comments.
Hey Luke,
I still read both Tim Lambert and Andrew Bolt
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/lambert_set_up_and_dispatched/
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/04/a_new_flavour_of_global_warmin.php
… I’ve never been selective
Luke enjoys his right to express his views on anyone and anything and takes every opportunity to exercise that same right but is not happy when others do the same; typical of the inherent hypocrisy of the dictatorial left.
Don’t you just love Bonkers Bolt’s headline “Lambert set up and dispatched” – oh yea AND THEN falling off my chair he says “Some of this debate about statistical theory is beyond me” – well given Bolt is a nitwit – for sure. But now he’s trying to adjudicate on it. ROTFL.
Davidson says “Thank you, all. This has been a very civilised (and fun) discussion.” – So what’s Bolt on about – the chief protagonist is hardly complaining ?
Boofy Bolt has never seen a robust discussion and has gotten himself into an lather! Jeeeezzzz..
On uncertainty the IPCC may have thought about for a widdle while. We’ll have to wait with baited breath and see.
But maybe there could be some clues for peekers and punters.
http://www.junkscience.com/draft_AR4/Ch09_SOD_Text_TSU_FINAL.pdf
So Rog what’s it like having Graeme for a cousin.
Just do one thing for us Rog – very simple. Just say you fully support his position.
Andrew Bolt says “I note Davidson’s civility, and Lambert’s sneering and jeering, which is typical not just of him but of so many warming cultists.”
How true!
Travis? Travis? Are you listening.
Now I’ve come here with a scoop for you.
Are you not interested?
Because I’ve come here and I’ve shown you that the energy-deprivation crusade is a fraud and has absolutely no justification for its economic vandalism. I’ve proved to you that they have no evidence at all.
No Travis. Did you KNOW that before I came here?
If you didn’t then surely I’m doing you a favour.
THANK ME NOW YOU LOATHSOME UNGRATEFUL IDIOT!!!!!
Oh I see???????????
You don’t believe me??????
You disagree with me??????
Well stop your whining and come up with some evidence you jerk.
What we are after is evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming or evidence that a little bit of human-induced-warming is a BAD thing during a brutal, pulverising ice age.
Travis. You have just confessed to be a tribal, leftist idiot. A savage. A moron who not only doesn’t know the truth, isn’t interested the truth. But in fact will believe whatever the tribe believes for no reason at all.
And I’ll bet you are a taxeater as well.
Where were you when Luke was being a rude bastard hey?
One rule for Luke and another for me hey Travis?
So you’re a bigot as well. But I could handle you being a bigot if you would just be willing to use your brain.
Andrew Bolt doesn’t approve of sneering and jeering? Mr Pot, I’d like to introduce you to Mr Kettle.
I’ve just deleted the last 20 comments on this thread because of bad really bad language. SJT gets the last say. Thread closed.