For Mathusalah, i have a link to the story (it's from 2007)

http://www.perthnow.com.au/perth-faces- ... 1112937539

Personally i reckon Tim Flannery got carried away with his suggestion Perth would become uninhabitable. That's nonsense, Perth isn't particularly hot by world standards - Not much different from Udon. There are plenty of hotter places - Perth averages 3-4 days over 40 centigrade a year, but their are cities where the average temperature is over 50 degrees for the hottest months - people still live there. So even a 6 degree rise isn't going to make Perth uninhabitable. Scare mongering is stupid - easy to debunk and undermines serious attempts to show what climate change could mean.

Noosard posted a bit about Carbon emissions declining by 8.7% in the uk last year -

UK greenhouse gas emissions rise
31 Mar 2011 61 UK greenhouse gas emissions rise
UK greenhouse gas emissions fall 8.7%
1 Feb 2011 42 UK greenhouse gas emissions fall 8.7%
UK greenhouse gas emissions fall
1 Feb 2011UK greenhouse gas emissions fall
UK greenhouse gas emissions drop by 8.6%
25 Mar 2010UK greenhouse gas emissions drop by 8.6%
UK greenhouse emissions still rising

but he said they couldn't make their minds up in the related content - but that is because it relates to different years or even Australia. Obviously it sometimes rises - in cold years for instance. You do need to read what you refer too. Anyway, his original link was interesting, as a graph in it shows that CO2 emissions in the UK have fallen by over 30% in the last 25 years, mainly in a slowly declining trend. There are many factors behind this - warmer weather means less heating needed, recessions can cut emissions and the fuels used have changed (19% of Electricity last year from renewables, a big jump in the last few years). Also, taking into account the fact that population has risen by about 14% in that time, per capita emissions have fallen even more.

It does look like the worst case scenarios are getting less likely - but warming is still happening; arctic sea ice last month hit a new low, even the Antarctic ice sheet is shrinking (although some seasonal sea ice has increased) and plenty of new warmest records around the world still set every year.

Ronan & Rick.
My grateful thanks to each of you, for your kind efforts on my behalf.
PS. On the credit side, I am happy with my memory as regards the subject matter; on the debit side, that I thought the debate was around two years ago, is just a wee bit of a worry!!

mathusalah80 wrote:Ronan & Rick.
My grateful thanks to each of you, for your kind efforts on my behalf.
PS. On the credit side, I am happy with my memory as regards the subject matter; on the debit side, that I thought the debate was around two years ago, is just a wee bit of a worry!!

https://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2015/ ... heatwaves/

Whoa check this out: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04 ... ming-data/

A major inquiry has been launched into the reliability of official global surface temperature records following widespread allegations that data has been manipulated to prove that global warming is happening.

According to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), from which the US government draws official statistics, 2014 was the hottest year globally since records began in 1880. However, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama (UAH), both of which rely on satellite systems to gauge global temperatures, show no such warming.

NOAA gathers its data from a network of more than 3,000 weather stations known as the Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN).However, in the light of the different pictures being painted by the satellites and weather stations, analysts have examined the data and point to hundreds of examples of data from the weather stations being “adjusted”, potentially exaggerating global warming.

Writing in the Telegraph, Christopher Booker explained: “Figures from earlier decades have repeatedly been adjusted downwards and more recent data adjusted upwards, to show the Earth having warmed much more dramatically than the original data justified.”

In order to determine whether or not the data from the weather stations has been skewed, the Global Warming Policy Foundation has assembled an international team of experts including eminent climatologists, physicists and statisticians, to analyse the data and settle the matter.

http://www.tempdatareview.org/

Interesting that Thailands hottest temp occurred 55 years ago

The highest temperature recorded in Thailand was 44.5C which occurred on April 27, 1960 in Uttaradit province. The Meteorological Department warned in March that temperatures during this dry season could..match the temperatures of 55 years ago



link:http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general ... -next-week. View our policies at http://goo.gl/9HgTd and http://goo.gl/ou6Ip. © Post Publishing PCL. All rights reserved.

GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS AND SOCIALIST CONTROL FREAKS:

Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."

Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer."

Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated...It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."

Quote by Ted Turner, billionaire, founder of CNN and major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."

http://www.c3headlines.com/global-warmi ... es.html%20

Greenpeace faces shutdown after India freezes funds in charity crackdown

"Greenpeace India is facing imminent closure after authorities froze its bank accounts leaving it with little funds, the environmental group's head said late on Tuesday, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government of "strangulation by stealth".

The home ministry last month blocked foreign funding to the local branch of Greenpeace and suspended its registration for six months. Officials said the charity was misreporting funds and using unaccounted foreign aid to stall development projects.

Greenpeace India, which has campaigned against coal mining, genetically modified food and nuclear power projects, rejects the allegations. It says the government is trying to silence criticism and dissent in the world's largest democracy."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/05/0 ... 5F20150506

Looks like India plans to burn a lot of coal. We're doomed!!!

Australia will have to move away from coal, UN climate head says

"Australia shares a similar challenge in moving away from coal as Saudi Arabia does in reducing its economic dependency on oil, the United Nations' top climate negotiator says."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ ... gvfvz.html

Saudi Arabia will reduce its economic dependence on oil when it sells the last drop.

India and China plan to increase their coal use.

Never let an un-elected UN bureaucrat tell you how to run your economy.

Such a cynic, Ronan.

China's coal consumption FELL in 2014 and has been increasing at a slowing rate for the past 3 years. Peak coal for China will probably occur this decade (maybe it already has....)

http://www.greenpeace.org/international ... chievable/

rick wrote:Such a cynic, Ronan.

China's coal consumption FELL in 2014 and has been increasing at a slowing rate for the past 3 years. Peak coal for China will probably occur this decade (maybe it already has....)

http://www.greenpeace.org/international ... chievable/

Hahaha - does "increasing at a slowing rate" mean that China's coal consumption is still increasing? I think it does.

Very simply put - CHINA'S COAL CONSUMPTION IS INCREASING.

The Chinese economy has slowed the past few years - hence coal consumption "increasing at a slowing rate".

Greenpiss are so untruthful.

China assess peak coal at about 2020, and then MAY think about doing something about it at 2031.

In short - India and China MAY think about reducing coal consumption about 2031.

According to you and other alarmist we ran out of time about 5 years ago -WE MUST ACT NOW.

So if China and India continue with their proposed plan we are doomed.

No wonder India is stopping Greenfleece interfering with its economy.

Greenfleece - an unelected overpayed elite who try to dictate energy policy to nation states.

The 22 Inconvenient Truths

1. The Mean Global Temperature has been stable since 1997, despite a continuous increase of the CO2 content of the air
2. 57% of the cumulative anthropic emissions since the beginning of the Industrial revolution have been emitted since 1997, but the temperature has been stable.
3. The amount of CO2 of the air from anthropic emissions is today no more than 6% of the total CO2 in the air (as shown by the isotopic ratios 13C/12C) instead of the 25% to 30% said by IPCC.
4. The lifetime of CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is about 5 years instead of the 100 years said by IPCC.
5. The changes of the Mean Global Temperature are more or less sinusoidal with a well defined 60 year period. We are at a maximum of the sinusoid(s) and hence the next years should be cooler as has been observed after 1950.
6. The absorption of the radiation from the surface by the CO2 of the air is nearly saturated.
7. In some geological periods the CO2 content of the air has been up to 20 times today’s content, and there has been no runaway temperature increase!
8. The sea level is increasing by about 1.3 mm/year according to the data of the tide-gauges ; no acceleration has been observed during the last decades; the raw measurements at Brest since 1846 and at Marseille since the 1880s are slightly less than 1.3 mm/year.
9. The “hot spot” in the inter-tropical high troposphere has not been observed and does not exist.
10. The water vapour content of the air has been roughly constant since more than 50 years: the IPCC foretold the opposite to assert its “positive water vapour feedback” with increasing CO2. The observed “feedback” is negative.
11. The maximum surface of the Antarctic ice-pack has been increasing every year since we have satellite observations.
12. The sum of the surfaces of the Arctic and Antarctic icepacks is about constant, their trends are phase-opposite; their total albedo is about constant.
13. The measurements from the 3000 oceanic ARGO buoys since 2003 may suggest a slight decrease of the oceanic heat content between the surface and a depth 700 m with very significant regional differences.
14. The observed outgoing longwave emission of the globe is increasing; the “blanket” effect of CO2 or CH4 “greenhouse gases” is not seen.
15. The Stefan Boltzmann formula does not apply to gases, as they are neither black bodies, nor grey bodies: why does the IPCC community use it for gases ?
16. The trace-gases cannot “heat the surface“, according to the second principle of thermodynamics which prohibits heat transfer from a cooler body to a warmer body.
17. The temperatures have always driven the CO2 content of the air, never the reverse.
18. The CLOUD project at the European Center for Nuclear Research is probing the Svensmark-Shaviv hypothesis on the role of cosmic rays modulated by the solar magnetic field on the low cloud coverage
19. Numerical “Climate models” are not consistent regarding cloud coverage which is the main driver of the surface temperatures.
20. The forecasts of the “climate models” are diverging more and more from the observations. A model is not a scientific proof of a fact and if proven false by observations (or falsified) it must be discarded, audited and corrected.
21. “we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
22. Last but not least the IPCC is neither a scientific organization nor an independent organization: the summary for policy makers, the only part of the report read by international organizations, politicians and media is written under the very close supervision of the representative of the countries and of the non-governmental pressure groups.

The governing body of the IPCC is made of a minority of scientists almost all of them promoters of the environmentalist ideology, and a majority of state representatives and of non-governmental green organizations.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/12/2 ... te-truths/

Sorry Ronan, you cannot debunk one set of claims (whose authenticity i haven't time to check) with another set which may be just as dodgy or more so.
i took one claim, the Brest tidal gauge measurements and checked it WRONG! It might AVERAGE 1.3mm a year over the last 170 years, but the rate over the last 40 years is about 3 mm a year. Here is a graph from PSMSL

http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr ... 1_high.png

So i guess the rest of the claims are mainly lies, disinformation or 'selective truths' but out of context .... but what else can we expect from a site that peddles misinformation.

rick wrote:Sorry Ronan, you cannot debunk one set of claims (whose authenticity i haven't time to check) with another set which may be just as dodgy or more so.
i took one claim, the Brest tidal gauge measurements and checked it WRONG! It might AVERAGE 1.3mm a year over the last 170 years, but the rate over the last 40 years is about 3 mm a year. Here is a graph from PSMSL

http://www.psmsl.org/data/obtaining/rlr ... 1_high.png

So i guess the rest of the claims are mainly lies, disinformation or 'selective truths' but out of context .... but what else can we expect from a site that peddles misinformation.

You do manage to get things wrong on a regular basis:

"The Brest tide-gauge record (Wöppelmann et al., 2008) provides a regional, long-term alternative observational record to our Newtown reconstructions and the shorter duration tide-gauge records of Southampton and Portsmouth. Standard linear regression analysis for the 19th and 20th century parts of the Brest record are View the MathML source and View the MathML source respectively (Wöppelmann et al., 2008). In the Morbihan Gulf, Rossi et al. (2011) reconstruct a rate of RSL over the last 150 years of View the MathML source that they suggest agrees with the Brest tide-gauge record but which does not replicate the long-term acceleration recorded by this tide gauge."

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 1X13006468

And if you took the trouble of actually reading the article, instead of automatically going into denial mode you will find:

"Truth n°8 The sea level is increasing by about 1.3 mm/year according to the data of the tide-gauges (after correction of the emergence or subsidence of the rock to which the tide gauge is attached, nowadays precisely known thanks to high precision GPS instrumentation); no acceleration has been observed during the last decades; the raw measurements at Brest since 1846 and at Marseille since the 1880s are slightly less than 1.3 mm/year.

[Poitou & Bréon] The reader will see there an obvious attempt to deceive. Why use the Brest tide gauge as representative of the world’s oceans, the sea level is very well measured by satellite, and those measurements show unambiguously a rise by 3 mm/year. Compiling data from tide gauges around the globe clearly suggest an accelerating trend. The sea level rise is by no means uniform: sea is not flat. Currents play an important role in the geographical distribution of the sea level rise. The French measurements are related to a minute share of the oceans.

A “clean” International Terrestrial Reference Frame recalibration of the GPS data [28] leaves +1.3 mm/year for a representative set of tide gauges over the world. For the protection of the coasts it is the tide-gauges and the highest sea level during tempests and high tides that are relevant!

For France the tide-gauges of Brest (n°1 of the psml.org database) and Marseilles are relevant: figure 8-A from a recent thesis [29] show yearly averages of the levels of the mean high water and mean low water (1846-2007). The 18.6 years lunar cycles are prominent and have sometimes been mistaken for short-time accelerations of the mean sea level."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/05/12/2 ... te-truths/

Try harder Rick. And stop believing the rubbish Greenpiss tells you - do you really donate money to those meatheads?

So much for peak oil

"With plenty of oil still left in familiar locations, forecasts that the world’s reserves are drying out have given way to predictions that more oil than ever before can be found," the report said.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/opec- ... 37972.html

Britain’s Crazy Climate Policy

Date: 07/06/15 David Rose, Mail on Sunday
How world’s biggest green power plant is cutting down forests, increasing CO2 emissions and making energy more expansive.

It is touted as the flagship of Britain’s energy future: the world’s biggest green power plant burning wood pellets to generate renewable biomass electricity that will safeguard the planet for our children.

But today The Mail on Sunday can expose the hypocrisy that underpins the Drax power station in North Yorkshire – which far from curbing greenhouse emissions, is actually increasing them, while adding huge sums to the nation’s power bills.

Oh dear, the leftards will have nowhere left to go since Pravda has come out against the:

Errors and frauds of global warming science:

http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/ ... science-0/

And this is one of the comments to that article:

The failed mushroom researcher strikes again. Gary Novak has come up with huge numbers of unbelievable claims about various branches of science, from mushrooms to physics and climatology. His problem is that no serious researchers believe his unbelievable claims. No research institute is willing to offer him a job, so everything the failed mushroom researcher does is done on an independent hobby basis, with limited possibilities for communication with people with knowledge about the fields he is jumping into. His lack of knowledge is scaring; for example he writes the following: "Why do nonscientists assume it is self-evident that greenhouse gases create global warming, when scientists cannot describe a mechanism? Extreme over-simplification appears to be the reason. They assume that absorbing radiation is producing heat. Guess what. A jar of pickles absorbs radiation but it doesn't heat the kitchen. " What nonsense! If there is an infrared heater in the kitchen and there is a jar of pickles standing on the kitchen bench, the jar of pickles will DEFINITELY absorb radiation, the temperature in the jar of pickles will DEFINITELY go up, and the jar of pickles will DEFINITELY heat the kitchen. Gary Novak has huge problems understanding even the most basic laws of Nature. Pravda finds the weirdest writers. Most of what is written in Pravda is nonsense.

And while we are here may as well post a couple of the latest 'claims'. As don't have the time to research behind the headlines, cannot say how reliable these claims are, but well, someone thinks they have the proof ....

US scientists: Global warming pause 'no longer valid'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33006179

China greenhouse gases: Progress is made, report says

Basically claims China's use of coal may already have peaked....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33040965

I'm surprised this thread is still open. The earth could be 50 degrees celsius warmer and the denialists would still be posting from indoors denying that the earth is warming. I think most of them are addicted to environmental viagara.

I think ronan is on a sabatical he has not posted for a long time on this subject or maybe:

It has all proved to be bullsh/t

Or he sick of trying to convert us???????????