Ops-Normal.org

...and more recently the "nasty" catholic boys who blocked that Indian liar and the bunch of semi-black foul mouths he was with. I hope the smirking kid sues that miserable CNN mob for all the sh!t he's put up from it afterwards.

Slash in certain circles that 'Indian liar' is being called 'Chief Sitting *****.' The only thing the kid was guilty of was a smirk, which I guess is now Facecrime, a la George Orwell. Once the real story came out, all went quiet at CNN et al.

Mrs Ex-Ascot wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 01, 2019 8:08 am

I believe that homo sapiens should make more effort into ensuring that we are not the cause, and if we are to clean up our act before it is too late.

TS you know I luv ya, but I think you're putting the cart before the horse somewhat. It's like one saying 20 years ago that we should ban plastic bags to ensure the stuff is not affecting things like the oceans. After debate and scientific scrutiny yes there is conclusive evidence that it does. This has not happened in the GW debate which is more like a screaming preaching match in public circles than a proper scientific deduction.

You're worthy of a reply because you stated a calm personal opinion with some supporting evidence. I quite liked that!

This is an interesting read; Vhttps://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47063973 I think that this shows how much impact we have on the planet.

I wonder if there is any correlation with the 25m deaths in Europe over a much shorter time scale in the 14th Century?

Wiki cites pre-Columbian population of between 50 and 100m and shows 20+m deaths in Mexico in the early 16th.

Clearly the significant population loss was in the very fertile tropical zone and rapid regrowth of secondary jungle.

Alisoncc wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 01, 2019 3:38 pm

Sisemen wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 01, 2019 3:37 pm

There are many eminent geologists and climatologists that now feel confident enough to come out of the closet and say that it’s all bollocks.

Please name and give references.

Maybe it’s becaus I live in the West where a lot of geophysicists and climatologists live and work because of the resources industries but these are just a couple of letters taken at random over the past few days in The West Australian newspaper. The authors of those letters seem to know what they’re talking about.

What does the O-N committee put the obvious changes in weather patterns down to? Do we all accept that the earth is on a warming cycle?

...mass killing of Native Americans caused change in climate...


So now we know what caused the Little Ice Age.

Normal cyclical conditions driven by that bright yellow ball in the sky.

No. I don’t necessarily subscribe to the idea that the planet is generally warming. We are working on far too short a time scale to determine accurately what is actually happening. Observable and verifiable data presents a confused picture and the accepted “pause” which has sent the AGW mob into a tail-spin is evidence of that. Some climatologists (it’s searchable Alison so don’t use that old trick again) postulate that, because of the Maunder Minimum (sunspot activity), we may actually be heading into a cooling phase.

As I have previously said, I suspect none of us here will be around to crow “I told you so” when our particular stance is proven. The climate IS changing. But which way and by how much?

Well, in my 3 score years and ten I have never seen so many 'different' enhanced weather events around the globe over the last few years. I call that 'Climate Change'.

The danger is that if we believe the 'it is not happening' brigade, exemplified by the excited bunch in Slasher's video, we will also ignore the very real changes in climate we are experiencing right now, be they on a short-term or long-term cycle, and due to cooling or warming, whatever. The impact of these changes on agriculture and food production shortages can be ignored, of course, but at our peril.

While it is terribly fashionable to shout 'global warming' or equally to rubbish it, it is vital we do not put fashion ahead of reality and ignore the effects of the changes and we must not fail to think ahead to its effects.

As I mentioned in a prev post Sise the climate is always changing on a daily micro basis and on a macro level over millennia. If it didn't it would indicate something is very seriously wrong. Despite TS's evidence (which I seriously doubt but I won't dismantle it here) to the contrary, I again state the Science, and I mean the real one, has not conclusively proven that the human animal nor cow farts are causing global warming via CO2 dischargement. Pollution yes but GW no.

As you say the time scale is far far too short for any measurable determinant which way climate is going. From what I've seen it's more or less dynamically neutrally stable (to borrow a Dutch Roll adjective) at present.

"Do we all . . ."

Pretty like the answer is no. The biggest issue for we O-N is lack of data. My own local observation over a 10 year period was positive proof for me that local temperature increase was consistent with the forecast for centennial global warming.

For other evidence I am restricted to second hand information from the previously explained Groups 1-3. I can only guess as to which group any report may be attributed. I do know however that some Group 1 scientists are not climatologists. In several cases where evidence in support of climate change has been put forward it has been subsequently been disproven.

Perhaps one of the best known data manipulation cases concerned the Antarctic hole in the ozone layer. The evidence was there but was discounted by NASA as a data anomaly and 'smoothed' out. It took British Met Office scientists in Antarctica, reworking the data, to prove the original data was correct.

I remain therefore a sceptic.

Here's one speshly for Boac. Go back to your old ATPL basic Met mate! Long wave radiation and all that stuff.

Not quite sure why you wanted me to watch that, Slash - I did not believe Mr Gore. Anyway I had a spare 3:30.

It was also just a series of half truths that didn't disprove what was said in the clip with Al Gore. Unintentionally, probably, it rather did the opposite.

The Heartland Institute was, before it jumped on the there-is-no-such-thing-as-climate-change bandwagon, advocating the opinion that smoking had few, if any, adverse health effects and called it 'The Big Lie'.

I did not believe Mr Gore

Maybe you didn't, but millions of gullibles did and became convinced greedy capitalists were cementing the bricks to end life as we know it. The damn thing morphed into a religion of planet-saving know-nothings. We're paying for that now.

Ben, the sad thing is that there are obvious things that do need to change.

We have benefited from a huge reduction of visible atmospheric pollution - note my deliberate wording.

We no longer exhaust sulphur laden smoke from domestic fires and power stations. Contrast this with the huge number of Chinese coal fired power stations. If course our reduction benefits us but is insignificant compared with China.

We have changed our petrol to eliminate sulphur emission. We have eliminated lead pollution from engines and largely water systems. We have brought in stringent filters to eliminate diesel particulate pollution. These are probably insignificant when set against aviation and marine fuel consumption.

So the majority of people create the least pollution but as a population pay the most money for least affect. Instead of nibbling at the edge we need to fix China and India first.

we need to fix China and India first

I agree wholeheartedly. So why isn't that the focus of the environmental/Green religion?

Forty years ago, or thereabouts, we went through a period of two or three years when the big problem with the climate was that the ice age was coming. In fact some of our ""eminent"" scientists reckoned it could be as close as seven years away, and it had to be true because the BBC was full of it.. Not sure how they talked themselves out of it..

Ben, easy targets? There is a 'need' to do something and our politicos like DC (spit) justify our hair shirts on the idea we encourage the others.