|
Post by magellan on Mar 9, 2010 1:27:00 GMT
That's what we are being told. So where is it happening? if it isn't global, then it ain't happenin.
|
|
|
Post by stranger on Mar 9, 2010 2:03:34 GMT
It ain't happening. Mi amigos who live on the equator tell me it's a bit cooler than normal - in places that do not have seasons.
Stranger
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Mar 9, 2010 2:08:15 GMT
Is it not true we've been told drier places will get drier and wetter places will get wetter? Yet, as is the case with each AGW pronouncement, the opposite is found, but there's always an explanation, an out. This winter is a good example. Warmers say lots of snow is evidence for AGW. Of course it is hogwash. In 2007 when it didn't snow much they said the same thing. So which is it? Less snow or more snow is "consistent with" global warming? Another example is Africa. Last year it was reported by Nat Geo the Sahara is greening. The very last line in that article is "Half the models follow a wetter trend, and half a drier trend." Would someone explain to me how the hell AGW, a supposed hypothesis, can ever be tested when no matter what happens it is always consistent with a model or some study?
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Mar 9, 2010 2:11:28 GMT
That's what we are being told. So where is it happening? if it isn't global, then it ain't happenin. Surely, you don't believe everything you are told? ;D I think in this case, the definition of "global" is what is in dispute.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 9, 2010 2:15:30 GMT
That's what we are being told. So where is it happening? if it isn't global, then it ain't happenin. I'm still trying to figure out how record cold everywhere translated into record warm in Jan and Feb.
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Mar 9, 2010 2:16:14 GMT
Would someone explain to me how the hell AGW, a supposed hypothesis, can ever be tested when no matter what happens it is always consistent with a model or some study? I think you give too much credence to AGW by referring to it as a "hypothesis". Conjecture ( per Karl Popper ), would be a more apt and more accurate description.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 9, 2010 2:19:35 GMT
Would someone explain to me how the hell AGW, a supposed hypothesis, can ever be tested when no matter what happens it is always consistent with a model or some study? You don't need to test a hypothesis in politics. AGW has ALWAYS been politics.
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Mar 9, 2010 2:23:29 GMT
Would someone explain to me how the hell AGW, a supposed hypothesis, can ever be tested when no matter what happens it is always consistent with a model or some study? I think you give too much credence to AGW by referring to it as a "hypothesis". Conjecture ( per Karl Popper ), would be a more apt and more accurate description. Hence a "supposed" hypothesis In reality it is an irrefutable hypothesis which in essence is as you say, conjecture. The warming amplification of the tropical LT to the surface is another well documented phenomenon not happening that warmers would just wish would go away. They now say the LT can warm from any source. Ok, I can buy that......but it still isn't warming!
|
|
|
Post by curiousgeorge on Mar 9, 2010 3:17:22 GMT
I think you give too much credence to AGW by referring to it as a "hypothesis". Conjecture ( per Karl Popper ), would be a more apt and more accurate description. Hence a "supposed" hypothesis In reality it is an irrefutable hypothesis which in essence is as you say, conjecture. Ok. I'll accept supposed, although I prefer conjecture. 6 of one, etc. I think also that people tend to not realize that weather ( or climate ) is, in a sense, a resource. And like other resources, has value. Good weather being more valuable than bad. If, for example, I have consistently good weather/climate and I'm unwilling to trade it to you (and if you want it badly enough) we will eventually go to war over it. Poor example, since we can't actually "trade" weather as far as I know, but the same motivation exists; although it may be realized as a war over water or food, etc. Copenhagen and other similar meetings were,and are, examples of diplomatic efforts to "trade for weather" that typically preceeded shooting wars over other resources.
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Mar 9, 2010 3:29:08 GMT
It is not. The fear mongers are making one last push to pretend the emperor is well dressed.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 9, 2010 4:08:59 GMT
since we can't actually "trade" weather as far as I know, It's called tourism. I'll trade you my money for your good weather. They don't call them snow birds for nothin'.
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Mar 9, 2010 7:59:22 GMT
I must confess before the AGW Inquisition Great Jury that I currently bear some positions close to the heretic gang blamed and named as ´Deniers´, opinions and doubts which were not present in my clear and pure AGW and fully Ecologist soul prior to the finding of these Forum and threads withing SolarCycle24.com
I confess as well -this time before this heretic gang of yours which I´ve had humbly joined - that simplifying discussions in excess, mixing concepts such as climate and weather, continously introducing your own political ideas likes-dislikes hates and preferences with what we should above all try to keep as a logical and scientifically based discussion in order to prevail over some AGW´s manipulation, does not help your-mine ´cause´ as now me might be suscessfully reproducing what we are honestly critizicing: manipulation, alarmism and propaganda.
To let you all know -my new ´deniers´friends- which were the key points that turned my mind from being a Warmist Freak into heretics:
- If unable to explain what exactly induced recent climate oscillations within Mankind History, such as Medieval Optimum followed by Little Ice Age -ask Icelandics Vikings, someone wisely said here- If unable, furthermore, to predict next coming climate ´natural´oscillation... and admitting -as we now know- that such changes might sharply take place within only a few years or decades... How can we then make founded predictions on Global Temperature Trends for the next decades?
-When it warms somewhere it cools somewhere nearby... that´s all my ´scientific´background and knowledge -I admit it´s not much- but... what do we all and AL mean by Global (mean) Temperature rise or decrease?
It´s quite clear to me that for different opinions held in this Forum by different people, many of us do not really know and understand what and how is it really being measured as to get to a simple two digits figure that we take and swear in as a Global Temperature Reference which allows us -gods of knowledge- to predict a 1C, 2C or -2C temps increase or decrease in the next decades ... and that -we the people- really don´t even know what it would mean in case someone´s right, and for sure someone´s right!.. since we are covering all possible bets and got nearly all the Lottery tickets here, someone´s must be right... -AGW is not as much a Great Conspiracy but rather the coverup of the big geostrategic political game we are playing against ´uncontrolled´ emerging China and others. And worst of all: it won´t work .
Simple ideas and scares such as Global Warming or ´Obama´s turning us into Socialism´ or ´being now on the verge of a new Ice-Age´ are suppossedly easier to ´sell´to the great public for its more convenient manipulation than explaining people a much more complex scenario which surely bears economic, political, scientific and social arguments and data for just trying to predict ´how we all will be and do within just a few years´ what -in my opinion- is really worrying and not due to temps supposed raises indeed.
Best thing we can do is question everything, ask for answers, demand them, and above all think, think and think by ourselves and learn to discriminate solid-ground based opinions, unpolluted by politics, from manipulations from either side... (this is valid for xtreme ´deniers´as well for xtreme AGWs)
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 9, 2010 8:09:47 GMT
Karlox, where are? What is your native language?
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Mar 9, 2010 8:11:19 GMT
Kindly awaiting for my Sentence, in my final allegation-declaration I beg for your understanding since I am not an English native-speaker...
|
|
|
Post by karlox on Mar 9, 2010 8:12:23 GMT
Madrid, Spain
|
|