Visit the historic Lancashire Textile Project with over 500 photos and 190 taped interviews|2|0
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    25  26  27  28  [29]  30   Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted -  15/12/2007  :  07:03
I thought it might be a good thing to have a topic devoted to this important subject.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
Replies
Author
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    25  26  27  28  [29]  30   Next Page
 
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 06/06/2011 : 05:51
Funnily enough I watched a TV programme I recorded a while ago about roads and Gurney was well covered in that.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 03/09/2011 : 12:13
`Journal editor resigns over 'problematic' climate paper', abstracted from BBC News (02 September 11):

The editor of a science journal has resigned after admitting that a recent paper casting doubt on man-made climate change should not have been published. The paper, by US scientists Roy Spencer and William Braswell, claimed that computer models of climate inflated projections of temperature increase. It was seized on by "sceptic" bloggers, but attacked by mainstream scientists.

Wolfgang Wagner, editor of Remote Sensing journal, says he agrees with their criticisms and is stepping down. "Peer-reviewed journals are a pillar of modern science," he writes in a resignation note published in Remote Sensing. Their aim is to achieve highest scientific standards by carrying out a rigorous peer review that is, as a minimum requirement, supposed to be able to identify fundamental methodological errors or false claims. Unfortunately, as many climate researchers and engaged observers of the climate change debate pointed out in various internet discussion fora, the paper by Spencer and Braswell... is most likely problematic in both aspects and should therefore not have been published."

Dr Wagner, a professor of remote sensing at Vienna University of Technology, blames himself for this failing but he also blames the researchers themselves for not referencing all the relevant research in their manuscript. "The problem is that comparable studies published by other authors have already been refuted..., a fact which was ignored by Spencer and Braswell in their paper and, unfortunately, not picked up by the reviewers."

Tucked away at the bottom of the BBC article is the fact that, Spencer, one of the paper's authors, is also on the board of directors of the George C Marshall Institute, a right-wing think-tank critical of mainstream climate science, and an advisor to the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, an evangelical Christian organisation that claims policies to curb climate change "would destroy jobs and impose trillions of dollars in costs" and "could be implemented only by enormous and dangerous expansion of government control over private life".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/science-environment-14768574

Afterthought: I saw in yesterday's newspaper that 44% of Americans believe that the "end of time" is close due to all the earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and extreme weather. This is interesting when placed against the background that half of Americans believe that the threat of climate change has been exaggerated!

Edited by - Tizer on 03/09/2011 12:20:18


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 04/09/2011 : 04:08
Nice to see integrity is still alive and well. Not enough of it about these days.

I love some bits of America but it's probably the same 50% on both subjects. I've never been able to understand why so many Americans are so naive and easily misled.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 10/10/2011 : 07:29
There is some new research out this morning that interested me. For a while now I have been noting that our weather is being changed by the fact that the jet stream winds have shifted but nobody was really saying anything about it. New satellite data has triggered off research by the Met Office and it turns out that Ultra-violet radiation from the sun has been decreasing of late much faster than was realised. When the new data is fed into established climate models it shows that the jet stream winds are affected (don't ask me how!). The effect is that Northern parts of Europe get colder winters and areas further south are warmer. Basically we don't get the effect of the comparitively warm air from the heat store in the water of the Atlantic, it's going further South.

The overall effect on global warming is nil because the temperatures avarage out but as far as we are concerned in the North of the UK it means that we are colder and have more severe winters. The Met Office say that the only good thing is that it makes long range forecasting for the winter easier. The bad news is that it means the forecast for this winter is probably colder.....  Sorry about that!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 21/10/2011 : 06:38
See this LINK for new evidence of global warming which is bad news for the sceptics. These people are not connected in any way with the recent controversies. The dinosaurs will still argue but this is powerful new evidence and they will have a hard task shooting the new data down.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 22/10/2011 : 10:43
Thanks for posting that link Stanley. One thing that hasn't been made clear in the media's coverage of the Berkeley work is all the other evidence that exists for global warming. Ever since the frenzy over the emails at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) the impression has been given that the CRU's results are the only evidence for warming; in fact they are just one part of a large body of evidence. But because the climate deniers focused on the CRU data, Professor Muller at Berkeley decided to look at that particular piece of evidence again and finds it to be valid. Nevertheless, the deniers are already turning their guns on Muller and criticising him for making his results public before the scientific journal papers had been through peer review - these are the same deniers who usually criticise scientists for using peer review. Muller put them in the public domain because he wanted to avoid that criticism and welcomed any comments, concerns etc about his study. You just can't win with the deniers!

I was glad to see the link on the same Guardian page to an article exposing Nigel Lawson's errors and false claims in his denials of climate change. Unfortunately there are many people out there willing to support him because it suits their beliefs, regardless of whether or not he speaks rubbish on climate change and would say black was white if it suited him.

Almost simultaneously with the Berkeley report there was a conference in London (LINK) which brought together doctors, academics and military experts to warn that climate change poses "an immediate, growing and grave threat" to health and security around the world. I can't help feeling the developed world is dividing into those who have the ability to see that climate change is happening and the dangers it brings and those who either deny it because of their vested interests or because of ignorance.


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 23/10/2011 : 04:56
One is forced to wonder what the agenda is that drives the deniers to fight against what most intelligent people would see as incotravertible evidence. I can understand questions about the cause but not the existence. It seems to me that the two are mixed up when they are actually completely different subjects.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 23/10/2011 : 11:12
Another trouble is that, when discussing the existence of global warming, deniers always point to the warming and cooling that has happened in the past and ignore the fact that this is different.

In the last bit of the news story about the London conference is this section:
Without urgent action, carbon emissions could rise to levels that should cause major alarm, said Chris Rapley, professor of climate science at University College London. Already, he noted, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has risen to about 380 parts per million [ppm] - whereas in the millions of years before the pre-industrial era, it fluctuated between about 180ppm during Ice Ages and about 280ppm in the warm interglacial periods. If we don't do something, then at the rate we're going, carbon emissions will continue to accelerate, and the atmospheric concentration is not going to be 450ppm or 650ppm by the end of the century, but 1,000ppm," he said. "That is 10 times the difference between an Ice Age and an interglacial; and you have to be a pretty huge optimist to think that won't bring major changes."

 


Go to Top of Page
Bodger
Regular Member


892 Posts
Posted - 23/10/2011 : 16:31
Do'nt want to get into an argument, but Darwins theory of evolution, we will adapt to the conditions we live in, i live inIreland and they will tell me it's cold, but having been reared on the Pennines i find the Irish winters mild, like Stanley i bull mucked steam pipes with asbestos, and touch wood i'm still here, now we have children allergic to nuts, dairy products, and have an excuse for missbehaving, , we were glad of any food and ate anything that was put in front of us,and attention defficiency syndrome, a slap on the arse cured that when i was a lad,

Theres too much balderdash today, a hard live is what toughenns you up to face the world, god help the world, we have lost the will to survive


"You can only make as well as you can measure"
                           Joseph Whitworth
  Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 05:33
There's a lot of truth in what you say Bodge but I think that as far as evolution is concerned, the situation might be moving faster than evolution can catch up with it. We had a few millenia of conditioning helping us, the modern world is going to have to learn a lot faster! Fruit flies will be OK!


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
AiredalePete
New Member


29 Posts
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 06:50
"In the last bit of the news story about the London conference is this section:
Without urgent action, carbon emissions could rise to levels that should cause major alarm, said Chris Rapley, professor of climate science at University College London." - Tizer

There they go again!

It isn't the existence of global warming that most people are denying.  The planet is heating up at the moment. 

However, the notion that this has anything at all to do with carbon dioxide emissions has been well and truly discredited, disproved and put to rest. 

I really thought we had moved on from there.  By far the largest greenhouse gas of all is water vapour - and you aren't going to stop the oceans evaporating when the sun shines on 'em!


Insanity doesn't run in my family.

It gallops. Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 12:56
Hello Pete, nice to hear from you again. What planet do you live on?

We've dealt with the water vapour at least three times on this forum already. To save time I'll repeat what I wrote on 18/11/2009...

"Now it is true that water vapour accounts for around 90% of the normal greenhouse effect - you can see the clouds out there doing their job and keeping this planet warm and habitable (and that's only the visible part of the water vapour). But the water vapour is, and has been for millions of years, a feedback system linked to the oceans. It is maintained in balance with the oceans on a global scale - too much vapour in the atmosphere and it rains, too little and more evaporates from the oceans. This movement of water back and forth goes on every second, every minute for millenia. So if humans pump water vapour into the atmosphere it has no long term effect. On the other hand, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere is rising and this gas stays around for a very long time before it gets mopped up - you might say there isn't a safety valve like there is for water vapour. On a geological time scale carbon dioxide, too, would disappear back into the oceans but we don't have that timescale to play with."

The amount of water vapour in the atmosphere is balanced by that in the oceans and is governed by physics. In fact the only thing that changes the concentration is the temperature of the atmosphere which is why the water vapour concentration has risen slightly in recen times - it is going up in response to the warming of the atmosphere, not causing it.

Edited by - Tizer on 24/10/2011 15:08:05


Go to Top of Page
AiredalePete
New Member


29 Posts
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 23:13
Hi Tizer, it's nice to be back ya-hoo

Actually I'm on Cloud 9,

"On a geological time scale carbon dioxide, too, would disappear back into the oceans but we don't have that timescale to play with."

We don't?

What do you suggest then?  We all stop breathing and kill all the plants?  The combined amount of CO2 that humans create is a small fraction of 1% of all greenhouse gases. 

Eliminating our combined 'carbon footprint' or whatever silly term they use would have the same effect on the ozone layer as standing on a chair to get a closer look at the moon.



Insanity doesn't run in my family.

It gallops. Go to Top of Page
Bradders
Senior Member


1880 Posts
Posted - 24/10/2011 : 23:54
Yeah Yeah! ....Cows Fart and all that ...but then they always have !

What's changed is that we have GLOBAL INDUSTRY (much of it seemingly unregulated ).....

That's an awful lot more than just  a few more  cows ..........


BRADDERS BLUESINGER Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 25/10/2011 : 04:55
Nice to know that we have a broad representation of views. I'll stick with Tiz and Brad.....


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Topic is 30 Pages Long:
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    25  26  27  28  [29]  30   Next Page
 


Set us as your default homepage Bookmark us Privacy   Copyright 2004-2011 www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk All Rights Reserved. Design by: Frost SkyPortal.net Go To Top Of Page

Page load time - 0.688