Paul3446

Do you have a link to this data?

Klaatu

Do a google search for "HadCRUT RSS UAH GISS January 2008 temperature anomally" there are many links, so be carefull which links you go to for reliable info, but a certainty is that you won't find the data available on official sites.

I can give you some local info, Townsville in North Eastern Australia experienced it's coldest weather since 1941. Sydney had it's coldest December 25th in 13 years, we had the coldest, wettest end of summer (February) in 25 years. We have had no firestorms this summer contrary to "official" information. There have been no increase at all of hurricanes/cyclones striking land, unlike "climatologists" claiming 2006 would be much worse than 2005 (Katrina) and so on.

Klaatu

Afghanistan, experiencing the coldest winter "in living memory".

Martin2005

Hasn't it been the hottest summer ever in Perth though?

I don't have the figures but I was chatting to a chap from there and he said it had been 'unbelievably hot' there this year.

Klaatu

Hottest summer ever? Or is that since records began, reliable records began in the 70's. Hardly justification for the use of the term "ever". But we'll let the media and the IPCC scare the masses.

A La Nina event on the east coast typically leads to hot weather on the west. This ties in with a 36 year cycle. West coast gets hot, where as east gets cold and wet.

Humm..."unbelievably hot" on the west? No, but it has been hot, it just is. I've been watching reports for a few years now, and we're recording record lows more than record highs. The trend is negative, and has been since circa 1998.

PeteBrant

Are you actually denying the planet is getting warmer now?

Global Warming is happening, that is incontravertible fact. What is (apparantly) up for debate is what has caused it.

Martin2005

So when it's cold in Sydney then that supports your case, when it's hot in Perth then that can be explained away. Come on man!

You keep stating that you have researched this subject (which I'm sure you have), the problem appears that you have only researched one side of the arguement, the side that you want to believe!

Geezer

I think it's fair to say that both sides cherry pick their data or sources, it's human nature.

However, on 'against' side, it does mainly seem to be people from the scientific community who are saying it's a crock, whereas on the 'for' side, there are an awful lot of wannabes and people who like to get hold of a cause (read celebrities and politicians).

I'm sure that originally, AGW was thought to be genuinely happening, possibly people misunderstood what they were seeing, or just sheer arrogance that human activity could affect the climate, but now it has become a self sustaining thing, it doesn't need any hard scientific evidence any more, it'a sheer numbers now. Poeple have accepted it as fact, and alot of peoples livelyhoods depend on it being true.

This is not the same as a conspiracy, or telling lies, but people don't want to look at the very good historical and present data which refutes that we have anything to do with the warming climate. It's hard enough to get a minority viewpoint given the proper scrutiny it deserves, even more so when that viewpoint would threaten your income/reputation etc.

Geezer

PeteBrant

I didn;t say that - I just said the planet is getting warmer. And it is - I mean any suggestion it isn't, is just ridiculous.

boomer

....but according to that graph (for which you provide no source) the first 150 years were below Zero Anomalies, and it has only been above zero Anomalies for thirty-odd years - thus we have a lot of catching up to do.

Also, it was down at minus point-six Anomalies nearly a hundred and fifty years ago, but we haven't yet reached plus point-six Anomalies.

Plus, i think that your graph used ground-based thermometers, which suffer from the "urban heat-island effect". Nowadays proper climatologists used satellite based anomaly sensors, which are actually showing a slight downward trend

mb
p.s. The above text is as irrelevant as the slightly further above graph!

Tam the bam

Klaatu

These facts, source Al Gore by any chance?

I have never denied the planet is warming, interglacial periods are wamer. The climate is changing, always has, always will. But this cycle being firmly blamed on human activity, and transport in particular, is false. As I have stated before, the production and use of concrete generates more Co2 than all forms of transport powered by fossil fuels. So why is the "consumer" being targeted in the form of carbon taxes on petrol/diesel/gas/electricity?

The was a cooling trend between 1941 - 1970, then a warming trend from then until the last year. The decadel trend since 1998 is flat, or slightly negative. This latest data suggests the trend is significantly negative, which falls inline with non-IPCC funded research.

Klaatu

Looking at your graph, if accurate, there is a downward trend post 2000. If you look at more recent data, the data published in January, you'll see that trend continuing.

Martin2005

Why do you keep banging on about Al bloody Gore?

Carbon taxes on Fuel? since when? The fuel tax escalator was introduce back in the early 90's (before the GW stuff) and was actually suspended for many years - so nothing to do with GW.

Why are you conflating issues as well, gas and electricity are nothing to do with transport, they are energy generation, which creates more co2 than concrete production or whatever other smokescreen you wish to use

Fuzz

Looking beyond the end of our nose tends to open the eyes somewhat!

Klaatu

Al Gore is the new "climate change" messiah, saving the world through his, infactual, preachings.

The "escalator" was introduced in 1993, prices increased until 1999 and because of fuel protests, the tax representing 75% of the pump price of fuel, the increases were halted. This is a tax, a pollution tax on fossil fuel, a carbon based fuel. If that isn't a carbon tax, I don't know what is. It's still imposed on UK fuel.

You are wrong. The production and use of concrete does produce more Co2 than transport. Go research some facts like I did, I am not going to do your work for you.

Last time I got on a train in the UK, it was driven by electricity. Many busses around the work now use CNG.

Martin2005

When did I say that concrete production wasn't a greater producer of co2 than transport (I don't know if it is or isn't)? I said energy production was, and only because you were doing exactly what you accuse Al Gore of, mixing up the facts to suit your arguement.

The fuel tax escalator was not introduce to tackle global warming, it's just a fact.

And please come off it, are you seriously suggesting the primary use of electricity and gas is transport?

And whilst I'm at it, the most compelling evidence for man-made GW I have seen is the Ice Core Date, do you have a view on this, seeming as you know more about this than me (I mean that I not been sarcastic, you clearly do know more about this subject than me).

Klaatu

"When did I say that concrete production wasn't a greater producer of co2 than transport (I don't know if it is or isn't)? I said energy production was, and only because you were doing exactly what you accuse Al Gore of, mixing up the facts to suit your arguement."

I'm mixing nothing up.

"The fuel tax escalator was not introduce to tackle global warming, it's just a fact."

The fuel tax (Escalator) was introduced to "encourage" less use of fossil fuel based transport, thus reducing pollution from transport and reducing the need to build/improve roads. The "escalator" did end in 2000, but the tax on fuel is still applied. Where is it going? The escalator was a mechanism to apply tax on fuel ahead of inflation. It also was, and still is, a significant revenue earner for Govn't. I never said it was to tackle AGW, I said it was a carbon tax, which it is.

"And please come off it, are you seriously suggesting the primary use of electricity and gas is transport?"

I never said it was the primary use, however it still is in use by transport. In many local authorities, diesel busses have been converted to run CNG. More and more light rail networks are being built which run on electricity.

"And whilst I'm at it, the most compelling evidence for man-made GW I have seen is the Ice Core Date, do you have a view on this, seeming as you know more about this than me (I mean that I not been sarcastic, you clearly do know more about this subject than me)."

That's just one source of data, there many, lake bed sediments, etc etc. Viewed as a whole one can come to the conclution that this so called "rapid change" in climate is actually well within normal variability.

I would not say I know more than you on the subject. All I can say is I have been studying/following it since the early 70's. What I have noticed is the "politicalisation" of climate, the ever incresasing involvement of politicians in the field. This is a major concern for anyone and everyone, who is not to "benefit" in financial terms from Govn't cilmate policy.

Al Gore, via his father, secured majority of his wealth from...the oil industry. He now stands to make substatial gains in that wealth on the back of carbon trading. A scam if ever there was one.

Here's a good read...

Climate during the Carboniferous Period

And another one...

It's a death star, but that's life - Science - Specials - smh.com.au

Klaatu

Another interesting read...

Recent cold snap helping Arctic sea ice, scientists find

PeteBrant

The surface thermometer record is taken at thousands of points over the world, and has been for well over a century.

If the average of this record goes up, what would you say was happening?

dpb

The high water mark at the end of our creek hasnt risen one iota in the last 25 years - gotta tell you something

PeteBrant

Dave, the people making these readings aren't ****ing idiots, I reckon know at least 5,363 times better than you or I what can or can't contaminate a temperature reading, and how best to compensate for such events. - What do they have to gain out of presenting a false account?. The temperature record shows that the planet is getting warmer - so do measurments of the atlantic/pacific oceans.


What do you mean that there is NO WAY to take enough samples? If you take thousands of measuresments around the globe, is a pretty good indication - In general you don't have localised whether patterns around a square Km.

Again, the definition is irrevant - If your average number goes up, then on the whole, the planet is getting warmer.

Geezer

I don't think there is much debate about people knowing how to take temperature readings Pete, it's the fact that the IPCC is misrepresenting the data, for whatever reason.

I personally believe it is getting warmer, but doubt it has anything to do with us. The cool temperatures we have experienced are not normal, we are just returning to a more normal state.

Geezer

PeteBrant

Well that's where the debate is (sort of, as far as Governments are concerned, and therefore how it effects you, the decision is made) - Debating whether the planet is warming up is like stepping back 10 years or so.

Klaatu

How does one attach a picture?

Klaatu

Fact. It was warmer than today during the Medievil Warm Period with significantly LESS Co2 than today. Something Al Gore and the IPCC coveniently "forget".

PeteBrant

Type
Or click on the "insert image" button when you post.