Maxadolf,

A strongly worded post that hopefully will get noticed.

I see you live in Epsom.  I live not far away (at least in time terms) just south of Dorking.

Do you fancy meeting up for a drink or further discussion at some point?

Quote:


You pronounce on what is the truth and what are lies. I expect you are not a scientist but even if you were the scientific community is also divided on the proportions of the contributing factors to global warming.  The C4 programme represented one view which, regretfully, is swamped by what has become the politically correct opinion, also embraced by various ecowarrior and extremist organisations who preach that global warming is entirely to do with CO2 emissions for which our wicked capitalist society is mainly responsible.  They advocate that we should beat our chests, repent and stop flying.

It is interesting to note that this particular bandwagon is being driven by the UK and the fervour for the cause is lacking in other countries, first and third world included.

Your post seems to champion the suppression of free speach.

Quote:


To Maxadolf

suggest your read this (US Senate) about intolerance and the lack of respect for the views of others:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_i...

Climate change is no longer an exclusively scientific issue, it has become a political one.  Also, as featured in the C4 programme, more and more people are involved in and earn their living from the climate change industry and because their careers are at stake many try to stifle the views of anybody who expresses scepticism.  

Yes, but don't forget NGM'sG that the left-wing proponents only want to to force the middle and lower-class professionals down into the gutter to travel with the proletariat; whilst they as the Pigs enjoy the high life of seclusion and wealth with gas-gusseling limousines , just like the farmers used to do. This is the problem with no-brainers, and as you say the other rich classes will still be able to keep up with the Pigs, even if the Pigs continue to change the commandments on the barn wall every night, as they are doing!

The reality is in any case that for every global warming theory supporting scientist there is more than one non-supporting scientist. The reality is that we have always had long-term climatic cycles in the history of the world. The current one is no exception, and is not man-made in totality. As oil particularly is now a declining global resource mans' contribution with fossil fuels will also decline. On the other hand for any who still believe that there is a creator God, they like a certain CofE Bishop who has stated his views recently, may conclude that He is not too happy about the decadence, depravity and corruption in the current world, particularly of those like Ofcom and so is wreaking His vengeance on the Western world currently, although evidently not as severely as He did in the days of Noah?

Surely the reality is that a few demented scientists have come up with the idea of "global warming", because they wanted to try and make a name for themselves, and because they are so inexperienced that they have not lived long enough yet to learn sufficient history or to discover for themselves that we do have pronounced long-term climatic cycles in the world which are natural and well recorded; the politicians have latched onto this idea; the senior politicians certainly could not have worked it out for themselves, since as senior politicians of course the primary attribute for the job is to be sub-compos mentis, so one of their unelected advisers or consultants has suggested to them that there is a glorious taxation opportunity here if they latch onto the error of these demented minority scientists, because it is the best political opportunity since income tax to wrench yet even more taxes out of the struggling masses, on the basis that: " we do not want to increase taxation, and we would not tax you more; these will only be temporary additional taxes which we will levy, but we have to do this for the sake of the planet. We promise that when the planet has been saved that we will abolish these additional taxes just as we kept our promise with income tax and our stated need of it for the duration of the Napoleonic wars only!!!!!"

To lompos:

To save you the trouble of hunting down a summary of the Australian rebuttal of the Channel4 programme, here it is:




To see this story with its related links on the Guardian Unlimited site, go to http://www.guardian.co.uk


New analysis counters claims that solar activity is linked to global warming
· Study undermines climate sceptics' arguments · Correlations 'inconsistent' with temperature rise
James Randerson, science correspondent
Wednesday July 11 2007
The Guardian


It has been one of the central claims of those who challenge the idea that human activities are to blame for global warming. The planet's climate has long fluctuated, say the climate sceptics, and current warming is just part of that natural cycle - the result of variation in the sun's output and not carbon dioxide emissions.

But a new analysis of data on the sun's output in the last 25 years of the 20th century has firmly put the notion to rest. The data shows that even though the sun's activity has been decreasing since 1985, global temperatures have continued to rise at an accelerating rate.

The solar hypothesis was championed publicly in March by the controversial Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle.

The programme has been heavily criticised for distorting scientific data to fit the sceptic argument and Carl Wunsch, a professor of physical oceanography at MIT who featured in the programme, later said that he was "totally misled" by the film makers and that his comments were "completely misrepresented".

The new analysis is designed to counter the main alternative scientific argument put forward by the programme - that solar activity may be to blame for global warming.

"The temperature record is simply not consistent with any of the solar forcings that people are talking about," said lead author Mike Lockwood at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire.

"They changed direction in 1985, the climate did not ... [the temperature] increase should be slowing down but in fact it is speeding up."

Global temperatures are going up by 0.2 degrees per decade and the top 10 warmest years on record have happened in the past 12 years.

One way that the sun affects the climate is through clouds. The sun's magnetic field shields the Earth from its high energy particles called cosmic rays. The rays help form clouds that reflect the sun's energy back into space and cool the planet.

So if the sun's magnetic field is high, there should be a fall-off in cosmic rays, fewer clouds and more warming. But Prof Lockwood's data, published today in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, shows the sun's magnetic field has declined since 1985, even as the world heats up.

James Hansen, a Nasa climate scientist who was once gagged by the Bush administration for speaking out on global warming, said the issue of whether the sun's activity is causing global warming had been dispensed with by most scientists long ago. "The reason [this paper] has value is that the proponents of the notion that the sun determines everything come up with various half-baked suggestions that the sun can somehow cause an indirect forcing that is not included in the measurements of radiation coming from the sun," he said. "These half-baked notions are usually supported by empirical correlations of climate with some solar index in the past. Thus, by showing that these correlations are not consistent with recent climate change, the half-baked notions can be dispensed with."

Prof Lockwood said the study was "another nail" in the coffin of the notion that solar activity is responsible for global warming.

Nir Shaviv, an astrophysicist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a proponent of the solar hypothesis, has tried to rescue the idea by invoking a time lag between changes in the sun and its effect on the Earth's climate. But Prof Lockwood dismissed this as "disingenuous".

"Nobody has invoked that kind of lag before. It's only been invoked now as a way out," he said. Even if the lag were 50 years then he believes we would begin to see the rise in global temperatures slowing down.

Even though there is almost no argument among scientific circles about the role of human activities as the main driver of climate change, a recent poll suggested that the public still believes there is significant scientific uncertainty. Despite the efforts of government and campaigns such as Live Earth to educate the public, the Ipsos Mori poll of over 2,031 people, released this month, found 56% of people thought there was an active scientific debate into the causes of global warming.

A spokesman for the Royal Society, the UK's leading scientific academy, said: "This is an important contribution to the scientific debate on climate change. At present there is a small minority which is seeking to deliberately confuse the public on the causes of climate change. They are often misrepresenting the science, when the reality is that the evidence is getting stronger every day. We have reached a point where a failure to take action to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions would be irresponsible and dangerous."

Channel 4 and Martin Durkin, producer of The Great Global Warming Swindle, declined to comment.




Maxadolf