matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 2:44pm:


LOl matty....don't open this door....

MOTR wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 2:47pm:


Oh I'm not even going to start....

Introduction of a carbon dioxide tax to prevent (imaginary) warming, euphemistically disguised as an emissions trading scheme, is a politician's, ticket clipper's and mafia chief's dream. All will welcome a new source of income based on an invisible, colourless, odourless, tasteless and often unmeasurable gas. No commodity changes hands during its trading, and should carbon dioxide emissions actually decrease because of the existence of a carbon dioxide market (which is highly unlikely), the odds are that it will have no measurable effect on climate anyway. Nonetheless, the glistening pot of gold which beckons to be mined from the innocent public is proving nigh irresistible, and it is going to need a strong taxpayer revolt to stop it in Australia.

The present global financial crisis should be inducing politicians not to squander money on non-solutions to non-problems. Yet to support their plans for emissions taxation Western governments, including ours, are still propagating scientifically juvenile greenhouse propaganda underpinned only by circumstantial evidence and GCM computer gamesmanship.

Perhaps a reassessment will finally occur when two-metre thick ice develops again on Father Thames at London Bridge, or when cooling causes massive crop failure in the world's granary belts.

Bob Carter is an adjunct professor of geology at James Cook University.





I think that this says it all!!!!

Most recently, Italian scientist Adriano Mazzarella demonstrated statistical links between solar magnetic activity, the length of the Earth day (LOD), and northern hemisphere wind and ocean temperature patterns. He too confirmed the existence of a 60-year climate cycle, and described various correlations (some negative). Based on these correlations, Mazzarella concludes that provided "the observed past correlation between LOD and sea-surface temperature continues in the future, the identified 60-year cycle provides a possible decline in sea-surface temperature starting from 2005, and the recent data seem to support such a result".

Thus, using several fundamentally different mathematical techniques and many different data sets, seven scientists all forecast that climatic cooling will occur during the first decades of the 21st century. Temperature records confirm that cooling is under way, the length and intensity of which remains unknown.

Yet in spite of this, governments across the world - egged on by irrational, deep Green lobbying - have for years been using their financial muscle and other powers of persuasion to introduce carbon dioxide taxation systems. For example, the federal Labor government recently spent $13.9million on climate change advertising on prime time television and in national newspapers and magazines.

There is no “climate emergency”; the term is a deliberate lie. Global average temperature at the end of the 20th century fell well within the bounds of natural climate variation, and was in no way unusually warm, or cold, in geological terms.

Earth’s temperature is currently cooling slightly.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/

I will take my advice from NASA thanks!!!

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 3:37pm:


Logic that comes out your bottom.

Anyway, merry christmas to all.

beware wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 3:05pm:


Is this the type of model you are talking about?

MOTR wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 3:52pm:


And you don't see a problem with that???

The 'red' line is travelling up, but the blue and black lines arent.....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 2:46pm:


Poor matty is one of those unfortunate people that need to have everything repeated before the message sinks in.

I totally agree with beware and gizmo.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 3:57pm:


Exactly, these types of models are little more than data fitting exercise using an over simplistic model. As you can see these types of models do not survive the hindcasting test.

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 2:44pm:


Turn your airconditioning off Matty, open the door and go outside.
Just a thought..............

matty,

maybe it all moved up to the Pilbara:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-22/pilbara-sizzles-through-record-heat/3744692?section=wa

MOTR wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 4:51pm:


Providing you can explain 'how' La Nina, El Nino actually exist...other than as an 'excuse' for why the reality doesn't match the 'concept' of AGW....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 5:01pm:


I think this link explains it pretty well.

If you want to argue against it, you'd need to come up with some pretty good data yourself.

beware wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 4:04pm:


Just to bring you up to speed, beware, here is what has happened since that paper was published.

Scientific reaction:
"Errors identified by climate scientists "...range from the trivial (using the wrong units for the radiative flux anomaly), to the serious (treating clouds as the cause of climate change, rather than resulting from day-to-day weather; comparing a 10 year observational period with a 100 year model period and not allowing for the spread in model outputs)."[30]
"Within three days of the publication of Spencer & Braswell 2011, two climate scientists (Kevin Trenberth & John Fasullo) repeated the analysis and showed that the IPCC models are in agreement with the observations, thus refuting Spencer & Braswell’s claims. An independent analysis by Andrew Dessler also confirms the Trenberth & Fasullo result."

Pattern of publication&publicity matches previous such attempts
Michael Ashley noted that this paper was following the same trajectory as previous papers touted as demolishing global warming, that haven't stood up over time:[30]
1. The article is published in a non-mainstream journal, following inadequate peer-review.
2. Press releases from the authors exaggerate/distort the contents of the article to inflate its significance and increase the attention given to it.
3. News of the article spreads like wild-fire around the blogosphere.
4. Some media outlets take the press release and exaggerate it further still, so that the information that finally reaches the public has almost no relation to the original article.
5. Within days, experts in the field show that the original article is fatally flawed; but by now the damage is done.
6. For years into the future, the article is quoted by deniers of human-induced climate change as evidence that the science is uncertain.

beware is probably unaware how he is being used to propagate propaganda, deliciously ironic but at the same time tragic.

beware wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 6:51pm:


Another thing is, why don't we ever see the ALP and Greens walking and/or riding carriages for transportation? In fact, didn't Stephen Smith just this week request a plane to fly JUST HIMSELF?? How hypocrticial can it get?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 7:06pm:


Where is the hot weather?????

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 7:16pm:


I told you - the b######s in the Pilbara stole it! The Grinch probably put them up to it.

Gist wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 7:36pm:


the muslims in Pilbara stole it, like they stole Christmas.

beware wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 6:51pm:


Funny thing is I agree with the majority of this post. I'm pretty sure you are on top of your gender, so I'll give you that one.

There is no doubt you do simply cut and paste articles from the net.

I also agree that if real, policies to combat AGW need to be adopted immediately, and I too don't see that happening. If true, we are exhibiting irrational behaviour. Paradoxically, I also share your faith in human ingenuity and our ability to solve problems. 

Here is where we diverge. If global warming is a political stunt the birds, the glaciers, the flowers and mother nature herself must be in on it, because there are 1000s of natural markers telling us the world is warming. I'm sure some mothers are conniving and Machiavellian, but I've always taken mother nature to be apolitical. 

97% of climate scientists are telling us that the current warming we are experiencing is human induced and that if it continues at it's current rate, bad things will inevitably happen in the not too distant future. 

I believe we must act now and that if we act now the impact on our immediate lives will be minimal, and I mean minimal, with a huge environmental pay off in the future. We are problem solvers and the technologies required to solve this problem already exist. All that is lacking is a market signal and a better informed public.

MOTR wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 8:31pm:


If global warming is really happening, I expect that temperatures will reach a peak and then drop like an anvil taking us into the next ice age.

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 9:15pm:


36, 36,30,31,32,32 over the next 6 days in Griffith

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 9:28pm:

yes matty. It's called weather patterns. But I understand you haven't quite reached that in your studies yet.  Come back in a year

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 9:52pm:



It is hot. We have 31 degrees in Melbourne today.

Now that your pretty graph has proven Global Warming Theory I might use the CO2 fire extinquisher to heat up the barbie tomorrow....save a few trees in the process huh....

Where is the global warming in NSW???

I think it hit my room this morning.

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 4:22pm:


How about I try this one, just for you Matty?

And the answer is -
When it starts to get warmer!

matty wrote on Dec 23^rd, 2011 at 2:44pm:


In the last 3 weeks? in NSW? Mate, you need to look at Global mean temperatures over about a 10-15 year running average to see any pattern whatsoever.  You won't see anything significant looking at local temperatures over  a 3 week period. It was quite warm in Adelaide yesterday too for that matter, but that's about as relevant as anything else you've said.

Another poster wrote:
Quote:


I know what you mean. Myself, I don't believe in gravity. It's just a myth perpetrated by cosmetics companies to sell anti-ageing creams to women.  They actually look as young as they always did.