Climate change

[Proper Job]

I love this one.

 

Times on line

 

We dumped all of the raw data, so you have to trust us that our "value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data" is right.

 

You now have know way of disputing that global warming is actually happening!

Edited December 1, 2009 by Proper Job

[carlt]

I love this one.

 

Times on line

For those of us who never click on a Times linky...here is the true story:

 

The Daily Mash

[barge sara]

We dumped all of the raw data, so you have to trust us that our "value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data" is right.

You now have no way of disputing that global warming is actually happening!

 

I suspect there may be one or two sources of climate data other than the University of East Anglia.....

Edited December 1, 2009 by barge sara

[Proper Job]

For those of us who never click on a Times linky...here is the true story:

 

The Daily Mash

An excellent source of heart felt journalism.

 

I've also stopped worrying about water voles now:

 

Link

[PaulG]

I love this one.

 

Times on line

 

We dumped all of the raw data, so you have to trust us that our "value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data" is right.

 

You now have know way of disputing that global warming is actually happening!

So we now have our very own "Motley CRU"

[starman]

For those of us who never click on a Times linky...here is the true story:

 

The Daily Mash

 

Thanks for the link - great site; now on my favourites list

[Derek R.]

OK, you guys really should get to grips with how we are screwing up our planet. Thank heavens there's The Independent to set things straight.

 

Read the comments.

Edited December 1, 2009 by Derek R.

[Swallowman]

Did anyone else see that clown on the BBC TV news at lunchtime? He was quite serious in saying the world's sea level might rise by up to 42 centimetres this century because the Antarctic ice shelf is melting. Has he forgotten that 90% of it is already under water? Professor ? Someone ought to tell him about basic physics!! But he does come from Cambridge - almost in Fenland.

[WJM]

Since, unlike any other substance, ice shrinks when it melts, the best thing we can do about rising sea levels is to torch the polar ice caps - I think!

[carlt]

Since, unlike any other substance, ice shrinks when it melts, the best thing we can do about rising sea levels is to torch the polar ice caps - I think!

By shrinking I assume you mean reduce in volume, which is correct.

 

The problem is that the volume difference, of a floating lump of ice, is the bit that is above the water line so, as it melts the water level remains constant.

 

Because the Arctic Ice is floating the water level would remain constant, if it melted.

 

the problems really start when the Antarctic ice starts to melt, which is sitting on a land mass.

 

Did anyone else see that clown on the BBC TV news at lunchtime? He was quite serious in saying the world's sea level might rise by up to 42 centimetres this century because the Antarctic ice shelf is melting. Has he forgotten that 90% of it is already under water? Professor ? Someone ought to tell him about basic physics!! But he does come from Cambridge - almost in Fenland.

You're mixing up your hemispheres. The Arctic is a floating ice mass. The Antarctic is Ice on a land mass.

 

Basic Geography.

[NB Alnwick]

If we are really serious about tackling global warming, internal combustion powered vehicles, the farming of domestic animals and the generation of energy by any means other than wind, solar and water power would become a thing of the past - somehow, I cannot see it ever happening . . .

[RLWP]

If we are really serious about tackling global warming, internal combustion powered vehicles, the farming of domestic animals and the generation of energy by any means other than wind, solar and water power would become a thing of the past - somehow, I cannot see it ever happening . . .

 

I'm not so sure. In the early 19th century, no-one messed about with nasty, oily substances stuck in the ground because the finest lamp oil came from whales. Why would they ever want to change? Before Elizabethan times, no-one really bothered digging coal because the woods were full of trees.

 

I won't predict how things will be powered in the future, but there is a good chance it won't be the same as it is today

 

Richard

[Proper Job]

................I won't predict how things will be powered in the future, but there is a good chance it won't be the same as it is today

 

Richard

Dilithium crystals

[capnthommo]

I'm not so sure. In the early 19th century, no-one messed about with nasty, oily substances stuck in the ground because the finest lamp oil came from whales. Why would they ever want to change? Before Elizabethan times, no-one really bothered digging coal because the woods were full of trees.

 

I won't predict how things will be powered in the future, but there is a good chance it won't be the same as it is today

 

Richard

 

hi there

just a little addition if i may.

also since early 19th century world populaton has risen considerably (1800: 978 milion 2008: 6,707 billion according to UN report 2004, so of course the 2008 figure is extrapolated). And the use, as RLWP notes, of fossil fuels has grown beyond imagination as has the spread from largely european/united states to now include much more of the world. so there are now around seven times as many people, using a far greater amount, both as a proportion and as a quantity, of fossil fuels.

the problem, i suspect, is that from a consumer point of view the way it is now it is apparently easy and efficient, regardless of the reality. there are simply too many of us and we use far too much. but i don't have an answer that i can live with.

i do feel, however, that people in general will tend to say 'what global warming? look atb the lousy summer we have just had, and all the snow last winter' whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that climate scientists deal in average temperatures and in global and continental trends. it might be true that the warming we see is part of natural cycling but if it isn't and we sit and do nothing then we only have ourselves to blame. maybe it's too late and the critical point is already past - i hope not but...

anyway, that's all

cheers

nigel

[MoominPapa]

He was quite serious in saying the world's sea level might rise by up to 42 centimetres this century because the Antarctic ice shelf is melting. Has he forgotten that 90% of it is already under water? Professor ? Someone ought to tell him about basic physics!! But he does come from Cambridge - almost in Fenland.

Er, no. I think you're confusing the Arctic, where the Polar Bears are, with the Antarctic: the one with Penguins. Antarctica is a continent: most of the ice is on land.

 

But I'm from Cambridge too, so what do I know?

 

MP.

[journeyperson]

Er, no. I think you're confusing the Arctic, where the Polar Bears are, with the Antarctic: the one with Penguins. Antarctica is a continent: most of the ice is on land.

 

But I'm from Cambridge too, so what do I know?

 

MP.

 

That's why polar bears don't eat penguins. I think the guy on BBC was talking about the antarctic, there are ice shelves there too as well as a land mass.

[Nine of Hearts]

That's why polar bears don't eat penguins. I think the guy on BBC was talking about the antarctic, there are ice shelves there too as well as a land mass.

 

Also, there seems to be some confusion as to the argument. The GW sceptics aren't (except for the odd loony) saying that the climate isn't changing, they're doubting the level of influence mankind's activities have. I must admit, I remain to be convinced. I detect a lot of ego-centric mistaking of "the world" for "man's immediate environment", and "save the planet" for "preserve the conditions that prevail at present". I'm not saying "keep chucking crap out because it makes no difference", I think a lot of "green" initiatives are just good housekeeping. I just don't think we should start imbuing ourselves with powers we don't have, and start digging radiation shelters everytime a cow farts.

[David Schweizer]

Having studied some Geology and Palaeontology, I am less than convinced about the extent of man's influence on the present trend towards warming when compared with naturally occuring change. However, I am convinced that man is making a major contribution towards Global Pollution, which is causing all manner of Medical and Ecological problems, and I believe that targetting Pollution, which everyone can conceptualise, rather than "warming" would register far more easily with the General Public.

 

I am a firm believer in starting a debate where people are, rather than where others think they shuould be, and concentrating on pollution may be a more accessible avenue to persue, especially as the consequence of reducing pollution would have an significant impact on warming if it is being caused by man's behaviour.

Edited December 2, 2009 by David Schweizer

[kiki]

Thanks for the link - great site; now on my favourites list

 

Ditto

[nb Innisfree]

I predict when the life president of the National Mineworkers Union departs this mortal coil the government of the day will start extracting deep mine coal in a big way.

 

Tin hat on.

[Matthew Knowles]

That's why polar bears don't eat penguins.

 

Oh! I thought it was because they couldn't get the wrappers off!

[Kraken]

Did anyone else see that clown on the BBC TV news at lunchtime? He was quite serious in saying the world's sea level might rise by up to 42 centimetres this century because the Antarctic ice shelf is melting. Has he forgotten that 90% of it is already under water? Professor ? Someone ought to tell him about basic physics!! But he does come from Cambridge - almost in Fenland.

 

 

.

 

 

You're mixing up your hemispheres. The Arctic is a floating ice mass. The Antarctic is Ice on a land mass.

 

Basic Geography.

 

I thought that the floating ice mass of the Arctic was referred to as a polar ice cap, and that an ice shelf is floating ice associated with the coast of a land mass, the most notable of which are located in the Antarctic (the Ross Ice Shelf for example). So isn't it you Carl, rather than Swallowman (and/or the BBC clown) that has his hemispheres mixed up? Basic Geography really.

[carlt]

I thought that the floating ice mass of the Arctic was referred to as a polar ice cap, and that an ice shelf is floating ice associated with the coast of a land mass, the most notable of which are located in the Antarctic (the Ross Ice Shelf for example). So isn't it you Carl, rather than Swallowman (and/or the BBC clown) that has his hemispheres mixed up? Basic Geography really.

No it is a fact that if the arctic ice melted there would be flooding but not devastating.

 

If the Antarctic ice melts then the result would be cataclysmic.

 

 

 

The Arctic is an Ocean, the Antarctic is a continental land mass.

[stickleback]

No it is a fact that if the arctic ice melted there would be flooding but not devastating.

 

If the Antarctic ice melts then the result would be cataclysmic.

 

 

 

The Arctic is an Ocean, the Antarctic is a continental land mass.

 

Fact??!!

 

I predict when the life president of the National Mineworkers Union departs this mortal coil the government of the day will start extracting deep mine coal in a big way.

 

Tin hat on.

 

Interesting observation - I do agree with you!

[carlt]

Fact??!!

Yes it is a quantifiable fact.

 

What isn't fact, though, is whether either or both events could actually happen.