MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 casting aside the whole mini iceage stuff, are you saying that average temperature has increased over the last 15 years? I haven't measured them but acceding to the met office, Nasa and various other institution the last decade was warmer than the previous decade despite the suns output being lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) I suppose one could read this as I don't believe anything that doesn't support my point of view Do you think the scientists are actually making it up? I know this is directed at Cyclone, who I'm sure will eventually reply, but -as I'm apparently/generally of the same viewpoint as C on the issue- I'll post my reply to this: it's not a question of not believing anything that doesn't support my PoV, or that scientists are making it up (some have been proven to do just that, though)...the issue is that there are now far too much vested interests in the whole "global warming" thing (it's a global industry, with untold billions already committed, and more still at stake) to take anything one side or the other says without a hefty dose of scepticism. You cannot deny that pro-global warming scientists (hitherto very respectable types) have been proven to distort, bend and massage the 'truth' (of the data/analysis output) and even pro-actively lie to suit their agenda. They may be a minority, and the whole scandal may have been well out of proportion relative to the scale of the issue and affected it disproportionately, but in the end scientists are never supposed to do that at all: the data/analysis goes one way or the other, and that's it. When they turn into politicians, they lose any and all legitimacy as "scientists". Hence the "not trusting" approach ('prove or else'), which is healthy (IMHO). Incidentally, that's just reminded me of my 7-year old who is going through the "ecology/recycling/global warming" bit of the education syllabus at this moment. I'm scheduled to have "some words" with her teacher on Friday, as -however simplified the educational message may have to be for that age group- some of the material is clearly untrue, and some other of the material is clearly partisan (does not consider gaping flaws in the pro-warming canons of wisdom at all...it feels/looks like 'real time revisionism' ). Here was me, still thinking that a school's job is to teach kids to think for themselves first and foremost. That'll be yet another job fully delegated to the parents, then Edited January 31, 2012 by L00b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) I haven't measured them but acceding to the met office, Nasa and various other institution the last decade was warmer than the previous decade despite the suns output being lower. hold on, the data quoted by the mail says the opposite, what data are you using to back up your claim? Are you saying the blow quote from the mail is a lie? Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997. Edited January 31, 2012 by WeX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 hold on, the data quoted by the mail says the opposite, what data are you using to back up your claim? Are you saying the blow quote from the mail is a lie? Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997. I did give you a link to the met office site which states the last decade was warmer than the previous decade. I would assume what the met office say on their site is more reliable that what the mail say the met office said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I suppose one could read this as I don't believe anything that doesn't support my point of view Do you think the scientists are actually making it up? Which ones? The ones saying there's a problem or the ones who say there isn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I haven't measured them but acceding to the met office, Nasa and various other institution the last decade was warmer than the previous decade despite the suns output being lower. So why does Professor Phil Jones say in the last 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming... No disrespect but you know who Phil Jones is don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I know this is directed at Cyclone, who I'm sure will eventually reply, but -as I'm apparently/generally of the same viewpoint as C on the issue- I'll post my reply to this: it's not a question of not believing anything that doesn't support my PoV, or that scientists are making it up (some have been proven to do just that, though)...the issue is that there are now far too much vested interests in the whole "global warming" thing (it's a global industry, with untold billions already committed, and more still at stake) to take anything one side or the other says without a hefty dose of scepticism. You cannot deny that pro-global warming scientists (hitherto very respectable types) have been proven to distort, bend and massage the 'truth' (of the data/analysis output) and even pro-actively lie to suit their agenda. They may be a minority, and the whole scandal may have been well out of proportion relative to the scale of the issue and affected it disproportionately, but in the end scientists are never supposed to do that at all: the data/analysis goes one way or the other, and that's it. When they turn into politicians, they lose any and all legitimacy as "scientists". Hence the "not trusting" approach ('prove or else'), which is healthy (IMHO). Incidentally, that's just reminded me of my 7-year old who is going through the "ecology/recycling/global warming" bit of the education syllabus at this moment. I'm scheduled to have "some words" with her teacher on Friday, as -however simplified the educational message may have to be for that age group- some of the material is clearly untrue, and some other of the material is clearly partisan (does not consider gaping flaws in the pro-warming canons of wisdom at all...it feels/looks like 'real time revisionism' ). Here was me, still thinking that a school's job is to teach kids to think for themselves first and foremost. That'll be yet another job fully delegated to the parents, then Exactly and well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 So why does Professor Phil Jones say in the last 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming... No disrespect but you know who Phil Jones is don't you? Yes the man that said this. Speaking about the figures, Professor Phil Jones, Director of Research at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia said: "The warmest 10 years in all three datasets are the same and have all occurred since 1998. The last 10 years 2001-2010 were warmer than the previous 10 years (1991-2000) by 0.2 °C." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Yes the man that said this. So it looks like even he can't be sure.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 So it looks like even he can't be sure.... Can't be sure about what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now