Australian expert Ian Simmonds on Climate Change

Tell us again about the 100+ predictions that have not come true? If there is any denial, it is the denial of observational science and true belief in computer models. Garbage in/Garbage out or in the case of AGW, Gospel in/Gospel out.

 

I just want the truth. But when there are millions of dollars being offered by governments all over the world for the study of global warming there is going to be enormous resistance to any suggestion contrary to global warming that may jeopardise all that research grant money! The unprecedented actions by the warmist to discredit anyone with a dissenting view is very concerning. Labeling people 'deniers' smacks of religious fervor, it makes me think of the 'runners' it that old sci fi movie Logans Run.

 

No one on this planet with a halfway brain would denial climate change, to what degree it is man made is of course discussable.
I sometimes wonder myself why people are denying this change, and why they don't want to come forward with solutions helping to combat this fast happening life threatening change.
I really do wonder.....

 

It's so fast, nothing has happened for 18 years now. The model frenzy is coming to an end as far as relying on models to predict much of anything with faulty and incomplete data. Remember those predictions of hurricanes based on the models and AGW. Never happened. Remember the ice free Arctic by last year? Didn't happen.

 

You mean like the predictions from Easterbrook and Watts and co??

- - - Updated - - -

But there still has been change over a greater time frame - and the IR signature is still in imbalance

 

What did they predict other than pointing out the failure of the computer models? Unfortunately for those of you that believe the models over actual observational science and because of the failed predictions, people like Easterbrook have been paid attention to now since it is looking like natural variability is much more influential than computer models and failed hypothesis, something Easterbrook has been saying all along.

 

I doubt that there are very many scientists who would say that the orbital pattern of the earth and the fluctuations in the distance from the earth to the sun is zero percent of the formula?

Also I doubt that there are many scientists unaware of how the energy output from the sun can also fluctuate.

http://www.livescience.com/1349-sun-blamed-warming-earth-worlds.html

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=317

 

I read an article that puts forth why the last glacial period started. All due to those perturbations. Everything wobbles but there is a 3 million year cycle where it all starts over again. They can calculate this back 50 million years. The earth's orbit is elliptical, the earth wobbles on it's axis, the axis changes inclination and the moon's orbit changes. There were two periods where it could have started but the thought in the paper was that the moon's orbit gave it the push that was needed during the third period. Before the 100 thousand year glacial periods, they were 40 thousand years long due to that 3 million year cycle.

 

For God sake people these so-called environmental scientists cannot even predict our local weather correctly. Some days they tell me its going to be raining and wet, and that day turns out to be dry and sunny. Then the same idiots try and convince us they know-it-all about our planets climate system. All they are is a bunch of witch-doctors sitting around a table trying to predict changes by reading tea leaves, but they replaced the tea leaves with computer models instead.

When we have the technology and the intellect to have colonised our moon and a few planets, then I might start believing what these rat-bag witch-doctors (scientists) are telling me, but until then, they haven't got a snow-balls chance in hell.

 

Hmmm,
happy to see that you don't trust your own education system, our Uni's, our doctors, scientists and professors. Whom do you believe, apart from yourself?
Cheerio

 

It is absurd to think that warming is bad. Where is the most life? Along the Equator. Cold kills.

 

The point is: when professionals are "PAID" to lie and manipulate the truth, then you would be a fool to yourself to believe everything they told you on face value. No. I don't trust our education system!!

 

I think you are wrong. They are not specifically paid to lie but they provide information based on keeping the gravy train coming.

 

Hmm,
I believe our education system could do better, however I think it is not bad.
I however object education to be paid for.
I know three teachers, and all of them are actually quite committed, only raising concerns with the way we are heading, but still quite happy.
I trust our system more then I mistrust it.
But of course, anything can be improved.
Regards

 

Scientists and professionals manipulating or distorting data so it represents something different from the truth and facts, to me, is a lie.

 

You just visited Europe, and its a shame you didn't get a chance to see some European schools curriculum verses the Australian curriculum. Seeing the difference, you would immediately understand how BAD Australia's really is, and how much Australia children are not told verses their counterparts in Europe.

 

Yes, there is the example of the Climategate emails that fit into that scenario but there are plenty more that just believe and perform studies to support their belief.

 

Cd,
I am aware that we are lacking behind. However, despite their topnotch school system and free Unis, you wonder why so many countries, like France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, just to name a few, can't get their act together to do better in an economical sense. Their youth unemployment rate is huge.
I am struggling to see the reason behind all this. Anyway, different subject.
Cheerio

 

The climate gate emails proved nothing of the sort

 

That's true, but when you create an elaborate conspiracy pact around them they can be made to look just like they were written by pissed off scientists being obstructed in their work by RWNJ's.

 

LOL, it proved nothing for the true believers but it did prove that hiding bad data is a good thing for true believers.

 

ANY time you want to drag out the pathetic excuse for cherry picking that was climate gate please do so.. Anyone who is not a conspiracy theorist can see how the claims had more stretch than an elastic factory

 

Climategate was real and had nothing to do with cherry picking but lack of transparency and obvious hiding information to push an agenda. No conspiracy when it is real.

 

Well, the IPCC is at it again even though they get some of the basics wrong and every prediction from the organization has failed.

They are robustly, comprehensively, and consistently wrong. But it’s OK, they only want 0.06% of GDP (for now).

 

Thats it in a nut shell. Its about money, not science, not common sense, its about money. Well you may be willing to gamble your grandchildrens future, I'm not.