Climate sceptic scientist lets the evidence change his mind.

[Guest]

the reality mate is i couldnt be stuffed trolling through pages and pages of articles discussing how sceptics are more up with the science than belivers (google that). there was tonnes of the shit and i cannot be arsed proving a point that something that doesnt exist, doest exist! like man made CC.

That's your choice mate but you've proven my point.

Chook.

[Guest]

Case in point.

Chook.

So you agree with me that you are a lemming and a Google guru

CASE CLOSED!

thanks Chook

[Guest]

That's your choice mate but you've proven my point.

Chook.

No, you've proved our point

that you are blinded by reams of bullsh!t that you Googled and pretended to understand

[melon....]

That's your choice mate but you've proven my point.

Chook.

Actually the point is moot. This Muller bloke was never a sceptic. he was a scientist who criticised some of the methods used to come up with "dramatic" pro warming news. he was always an IPCC and Al Gore fan.

[Guest]

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/climat...801-23fdv.html

IN THE theory of man-made climate change, two-thirds of the predicted warming comes from changes in humidity and clouds, and only one-third comes directly from the extra carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases.

The theory assumes humidity and clouds amplify the warming directly due to CO2 by a factor of three: extra CO2 warms the ocean surface, causing more evaporation and extra humidity. Water vapour, or humidity, is the main greenhouse gas, so this causes even more surface warming.

Not many people know that. It is the most important feature of the debate, and goes a long way to explaining why warmists and sceptics both insist they are right.

The warmists are correct that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and it causes warming, that CO2 levels have been rising, and that it has been warming.

Serious sceptics agree with all that, but point out that it does not prove that something else isn't causing most of the warming. By way of illustration, if the main cause of warming was actually Venusians with ray guns, then all those things would still be true.

The sceptic's main suspect is the sun. While the sun's radiation is roughly constant, its magnetic field varies considerably. This field shields the earth from cosmic rays that, according to recent experiments at the world's premier atom smasher CERN, might seed clouds. Clouds cool the planet, so if the sun's magnetic field wanes, then it might get cooler here on earth.

We scientists can calculate how much warming results directly from an increase in CO2 levels. We know how much CO2 levels and temperature have risen since pre-industrial times, but the warming directly due to CO2 is only a third of the observed warming. The theory assumes no other major influence on temperature changed, so the effect of the CO2 must have been amplified threefold, presumably by changes in the atmosphere due to humidity and clouds.

There is no observational evidence for this amplification, but it is nonetheless built into all the models. Sceptics point out that if the extra humidity simply forms extra clouds, then there would be no amplification.

If the CO2 theory of global warming is right, the climate models should predict the climate fairly well. If the CO2 theory is wrong, because there is another, larger driver of the temperature, then the climate models will perform indifferently.

According to the latest data from mankind's best and latest instruments, from impeccable sources, the climate models are doing poorly.

The first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report in 1990 predicted air temperatures would increase by 0.30 degrees per decade, and by 0.20 degrees to 0.50 degrees per decade at the outside. But according to NASA satellites that measure almost the entire planet constantly, the trend since then has been 0.17 degrees per decade at most. The climate scientists ignore these awkward results and instead only quote temperatures from land thermometers, half of which are at airports where they are artificially warmed by jet engines and hot tarmac, while most of the rest are in warming micro-climates such as near air conditioner outlets, at sewage plants or in car parks. Obviously the data from these corrupted thermometers should not be used.

Ocean temperatures have only been measured properly since 2003 when the Argo program became operational. Some 3000 Argo buoys roam the oceans, measuring temperatures on each 10-day dive into the depths. Before Argo, we used sporadic sampling with buckets and diving darts along a few commercial shipping lanes. But these measurements have such massively high uncertainties as to be useless. Since Argo started, the ocean temperatures have been flat, no warming at all.

The assumed temperature amplification due to changes in humidity and clouds exhibits itself in all the models as prominent warming about 10 kilometres up over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmospheric warming pattern since the 1960s using weather balloons, released twice a day from 900 locations around the planet, many millions of them in total, and no such ''hot spot'' has been detected. This is direct observational proof that the amplification is missing.

The climate models predict that the outgoing radiation from the earth decreases in the weeks following a rise in the surface temperature, due to aggressive heat-trapping by extra humidity. But analysis of the outgoing radiation measured by NASA satellites for the last two decades shows the opposite occurs: the earth gives off more heat after the surface temperature rises. Again, this suggests that the amplification assumed in the models simply does not occur in reality.

Government climate scientists tend to excuse away these failings, often blaming unmeasured aerosols whose effects are only dimly understood. These excuses wear ever thinner as the CO2 level continues to rise but the temperature plateau of the last 12 years persists.

There are huge vested interests in the theory of man-made climate change. They will soon have to face up to the fact that they have been unwittingly relying on assumed amplification by humidity for most of the predicted temperature increases, and that the amplification is not there in reality.
__________________________________________________ _______________

Here's another sceptic that accepts the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and it causes warming and that the Earth is warming.

But hey feel free to ignore this guy too, ignorance is after all the most powerful weapon of the lemming deniers in this debate. Maybe, just maybe it's like he says and it's Venusians and ray guns that are causing it. LOL

The cliff is that way lemmings -------->

Chook.

[Guest]

Chook If I had realised when this thread started that I was entering into a battle of wits with an unarmed person I would have refrained from entering the discussion.

[Guest]

TIMMEH!!!!!!

[Guest]

Chook

Here is some more forward flat earth thinking from some of your heroes

FED:Union tells RBA to curb dollar strength

CANBERRA, Aug 2 AAP - The construction union has backed a call
by former Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) board member Warwick
McKibbin for the central bank to intervene to limit the strength of
the Australian dollar.
The Australian National University professor argues the
currency's exchange rate value is being distorted by foreign
central banks rushing to invest in the Australian dollar as a safe
haven from global economic turmoil, when the currency would
normally be easing with commodity prices.
The Australian dollar was trading just under 105 US cents on
Thursday, after reaching a four-month high earlier in the week.
"Our overvalued dollar is hammering the competitiveness of
Australian manufacturing," Construction, Forestry, Mining and
Energy Union (CFMEU) national secretary Michael O'Connor said in a
statement.
"If we don't do something, we will wake up from this episode to
find that the mining boom is over, the global economy is
recovering, but there is no Australian manufacturing sector left."
He said the central bank would be failing in its duty to allow
that to happen and there was nothing stopping it from intervening,
"aside from tradition".
The RBA could also lower the cash rate at its monthly board
meeting next Tuesday to put downward pressure on the currency, he
said.
AAP cb/klm/jsh

[Guest]

Chook

Here is some more forward flat earth thinking from some of your heroes

FED:Union tells RBA to curb dollar strength

CANBERRA, Aug 2 AAP - The construction union has backed a call
by former Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) board member Warwick
McKibbin for the central bank to intervene to limit the strength of
the Australian dollar.
The Australian National University professor argues the
currency's exchange rate value is being distorted by foreign
central banks rushing to invest in the Australian dollar as a safe
haven from global economic turmoil, when the currency would
normally be easing with commodity prices.
The Australian dollar was trading just under 105 US cents on
Thursday, after reaching a four-month high earlier in the week.
"Our overvalued dollar is hammering the competitiveness of
Australian manufacturing," Construction, Forestry, Mining and
Energy Union (CFMEU) national secretary Michael O'Connor said in a
statement.
"If we don't do something, we will wake up from this episode to
find that the mining boom is over, the global economy is
recovering, but there is no Australian manufacturing sector left."
He said the central bank would be failing in its duty to allow
that to happen and there was nothing stopping it from intervening,
"aside from tradition".
The RBA could also lower the cash rate at its monthly board
meeting next Tuesday to put downward pressure on the currency, he
said.
AAP cb/klm/jsh

Finally, someone has seen sense.

[Guest]

You him bob katter and chook can build a time machine back to 1952.

You will love it there

[Guest]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/cl...127-2a5tp.html

THE world is on the cusp of a "tipping point" into dangerous climate change, according to new data gathered by scientists measuring methane leaking from the Arctic permafrost and a report presented to the United Nations on Tuesday.
---------------------------------------------

More of those uncomfortable 'climate change is real and happenig now' facts for the head up arse brigade.

Chook.

[Guest]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/cl...202-2ap4l.html

THE world is on track to see "an unrecognisable planet" that is between 4 and 6 degrees hotter by the end of this century, according to new data on greenhouse gas emissions.

As United Nations climate negotiations enter their second week in Doha, Qatar, an Australian-based international research effort that tracks greenhouse gas output will release its annual findings on Monday, showing emissions climbing too quickly to stave off the effects of dangerous climate change.

The new forecast does not include recent revelations about the effects of thawing permafrost, which is starting to release large amounts of methane from the Arctic. This process makes cutting human emissions of fossil fuels even more urgent, scientists say.

The new data from the Global Carbon Project found greenhouse gas emissions are expected to have risen 2.6 per cent by the end of this year, on top of a 3 per cent rise in 2011. Since 1990, the reference year for the Kyoto Protocol, emissions have increased 54 per cent.

It means that the goal of the Doha talks – to hold global temperature rise to 2 degrees – is almost out of reach. That goal requires that emissions peak now and start falling significantly within eight years.

"Unless we change current emissions trends, this year is set to reach 36 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels, we are on the way to an unrecognisable planet of 4 to 6 degrees warmer by the end of this century," said the executive director of the Global Carbon Project, Dr Pep Canadell.

"Unless the negotiators in Doha wake up tomorrow and embrace a new green industrial revolution to rapidly change our energy systems, chances to stay below global warming of 2 degrees Celsius are vanishing very fast, if they are not already gone."

Emissions are growing in line with the most extreme climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, according to a paper in the journal Nature Climate Change that explains the Global Carbon Project's findings.

The trajectory means a temperature range of between 3.5 and 6.2 degrees by the year 2100, with a "most likely" range of between 4.2 and 5 degrees.

Although the climate has changed due to natural influences in the past, human emissions superimposed on top of natural variation is now driving change 20 times faster, according to NASA estimates. Civilisation evolved in a more moderate environment.

The new data is beginning to confirm what scientists had been warning people about for decades, said Andy Pitman, director of the Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at the University of NSW.

"There are papers that should come with a warning: 'do not read this if you are depressed', or 'please have a stiff drink handy as you read this'. [This] paper is one such example," Professor Pitman said.

The greenhouse gas emissions path the world is taking "is not a tenable future for the planet – we cannot be that stupid as a species," he said.

Matthew England, a colleague of Professor Pitman and fellow author of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, said: "While the science is clear that emissions reductions are required urgently, each year we are emitting more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This is like a smoker ramping up the number of cigarettes smoked each day despite grave warnings to stop smoking altogether – sooner or later this catches up with you."
______________________________________________

Oh but we can and we are professor, we can and are.

Chook.

[stephenj]

consider that this world is the only place we have to live for now, so the question must be asked, why are we so hellbent on wrecking it?

[Guest]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/cl...214-2bfoa.html

EVIDENCE for climate change has grown stronger and it is now ''virtually certain'' that human greenhouse gas emissions trap energy that warms the planet, according to a leaked draft of the next major Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.

Prepared on behalf of the United Nations every five or six years to summarise climate change research, the panel report draws on hundreds of peer-reviewed papers.

The draft expresses even more confidence than the 2007 report that changes being observed across the planet are historically ''significant, unusual or unprecedented''.

It says that carbon dioxide is the biggest cause of climate change, far outweighing natural causes. The concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide is the highest in 800,000 years.

Advertisement

The draft document - due to be released next year - was leaked by climate sceptic Alec Rawls, who runs a website called ''Stop Green Suicide'' and volunteered as a report reviewer.

Mr Rawls claimed the report contained an ''admission'' that galactic cosmic rays were having a strong influence on the Earth's climate.

But a lead author of the relevant section of the report, Professor Steve Sherwood of the University of NSW, said the theory had been rejected later in the report after a review of peer-reviewed research.

John Church, a lead author of the report and a senior CSIRO scientist, said: ''The report is still a working draft and these people have had access under conditions of not releasing the draft and not passing it on, and they have broken that agreement.''

Dr Church said the weight of evidence linking human activity and climate change had strengthened since the previous report.

The draft builds on the findings of the previous IPCC report that warming of the climate system is ''unequivocal''.

It says: ''There is consistent evidence from observations of a net energy uptake of the Earth System due to an imbalance in the energy budget. It is virtually certain that this is caused by human activities, primarily by the increase in CO2 concentrations.''

The IPCC was formed in 1988 on the request of UN member countries, and has released four major assessments of the climate to help guide the negotiations on a global treaty to cut emissions. Each assessment report is approved by all governments.

In 2007 it shared the Nobel Peace Prize with former US president Al Gore for its work on climate change, but it has also been criticised for being too conservative and for errors found in its last assessment report.

The IPCC draft report says global average temperatures had risen about 0.8 degrees between 1901 and 2010, mostly since the 1970s.

Other findings include that:

There is a high level of confidence average global temperatures will rise between one and 3.7 degrees by 2081-2100. The IPCC assumes some climate policies will be introduced.

It is extremely likely humans have caused more than half the temperature increase since the 1950s. There is a high level of confidence this has caused large-scale changes in the ocean, ice and sea levels.

Global sea levels are likely to rise between 0.29 and 0.82 metres by 2081-2100. Higher rises cannot by ruled out, but scientific understanding is insufficient to evaluate their probability.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Climate change sceptics should have "DENIER" tattooed across them and all their progeny's foreheads so that when human beings start eyeing each other off as a source of food in the near future, it's these farks that are cooked and eaten first due to the idiocy of their ancestors.

Chook

[Guest]

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/cl...202-2ap4l.html

THE world is on track to see "an unrecognisable planet" that is between 4 and 6 degrees hotter by the end of this century, according to new data on greenhouse gas emissions.

As United Nations climate negotiations enter their second week in Doha, Qatar, an Australian-based international research effort that tracks greenhouse gas output will release its annual findings on Monday, showing emissions climbing too quickly to stave off the effects of dangerous climate change.

The new forecast does not include recent revelations about the effects of thawing permafrost, which is starting to release large amounts of methane from the Arctic. This process makes cutting human emissions of fossil fuels even more urgent, scientists say.

The new data from the Global Carbon Project found greenhouse gas emissions are expected to have risen 2.6 per cent by the end of this year, on top of a 3 per cent rise in 2011. Since 1990, the reference year for the Kyoto Protocol, emissions have increased 54 per cent.

It means that the goal of the Doha talks – to hold global temperature rise to 2 degrees – is almost out of reach. That goal requires that emissions peak now and start falling significantly within eight years.

"Unless we change current emissions trends, this year is set to reach 36 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels, we are on the way to an unrecognisable planet of 4 to 6 degrees warmer by the end of this century," said the executive director of the Global Carbon Project, Dr Pep Canadell.

"Unless the negotiators in Doha wake up tomorrow and embrace a new green industrial revolution to rapidly change our energy systems, chances to stay below global warming of 2 degrees Celsius are vanishing very fast, if they are not already gone."

Emissions are growing in line with the most extreme climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, according to a paper in the journal Nature Climate Change that explains the Global Carbon Project's findings.

The trajectory means a temperature range of between 3.5 and 6.2 degrees by the year 2100, with a "most likely" range of between 4.2 and 5 degrees.

Although the climate has changed due to natural influences in the past, human emissions superimposed on top of natural variation is now driving change 20 times faster, according to NASA estimates. Civilisation evolved in a more moderate environment.

The new data is beginning to confirm what scientists had been warning people about for decades, said Andy Pitman, director of the Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at the University of NSW.

"There are papers that should come with a warning: 'do not read this if you are depressed', or 'please have a stiff drink handy as you read this'. [This] paper is one such example," Professor Pitman said.

The greenhouse gas emissions path the world is taking "is not a tenable future for the planet – we cannot be that stupid as a species," he said.

Matthew England, a colleague of Professor Pitman and fellow author of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, said: "While the science is clear that emissions reductions are required urgently, each year we are emitting more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This is like a smoker ramping up the number of cigarettes smoked each day despite grave warnings to stop smoking altogether – sooner or later this catches up with you."
______________________________________________

Oh but we can and we are professor, we can and are.

Chook.

I don't know how they gather these 'facts', but if anything it's getting farrken colder, not hotter.