An Entertaining Read

[Crick]

Graham Parkes in a debate against Christopher Monckton, Bored Viscount of Marchbroom or somesuch on the topic ‘manmade global warming is a global crisis'.

Monckton KO?d in Recent Debate | Global Warming: Man or Myth?

BTW, the vote at the end of the debate gave it to Parkes 100-3.

 

[Kosh]

Nothing the AGW cult posts is entertaining, it is just sad as they follow a religion and denounce science.

 

[Crick]

Ha ha haaa... Read it if you can. It's not THAT much longer than those books your mom reads to you but I am afraid there are no pictures.

One interesting point is that the fellow debating Monckton has no qualifications in climate science whatsoever. Of course, neither does Monckton, but there you go. An even playing field. And Monckton certainly has more experience with the field and with debating. Yet somehow he lost this one and lost it badly. Aren't you curious how? Always a good thing to know your enemy.

 

[SSDD]

An alarmist claiming that another warmist won a debate is entertaining to you? I suppose reading comments on a few out of context cherry picked statements might risle to the level of entertainment to you but it is just the same old reruns as far as I am concerned.

 

[IanC]

Monckton won the same type of debate at Oxford. perhaps it was easier to pack the house with sycophants that hate English Lords in Dublin.

 

[mamooth]

Monckton doesn't do debates any more. I think his humiliation at the hands of Peter Hadfield traumatized him.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K74fzNAUq4]Monckton responds (part 1/2) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[westwall]

I found this fairly down in the comments section. This was an interesting read. Funny how the alarmists are squawking about a supposed 4 meter rise in seal level when the reality is at worst it will be 1' 5".


Two thoughts on above. Unsure why Hunt mention Jason Box’s arctic study, but Nils-Axel Morner was clipped (perhaps catty comment?). But Morner is ‘the’ guy on sea level rise.

With respect to John making a claim of 4+ meters for sea level rise, that’s intriguing inasmuch as the IPCC said only 3 feet in 1995, downgraded to 2’11″ in 2001 and 1’5″ in 2007. Current rise is only 1 foot/century. Morner predicted 8″ and has been the closest to date.

As far as an arctic report card as shared by Hunt, let’s consider…

From the Danish Meteorological Institute: DMI 30% Arctic extent has reached its highest number for this date, exceeding 2006. “The refreeze has been very fast.” And… we learn, that Arctic 80N-90N temperatures in the melt season this year is colder than average. This was the case last year too, while earlier years in the DMI analysis period (1958-2010) hardly ever shows Arctic melt season temperatures this cold.

From JAXA, the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency: Sea ice extent shows sharp growth, exceeding the 2009 rate, and almost as fast as 2005.

From the new peer-reviewed research “North American Summer Arctic front during 1948-2007.” International Journal of Climatology 30: 874-883. Based on their analysis, the two researchers report that “the position of the July Arctic front varies significantly through the period 1948-2007,” but they find that it does so “with a mean position similar to that found by Bryson (1966),” which “close similarity,” as they describe it, “is striking, given that the Bryson study was completed over 40 years ago.”
In other words, no real change for 40 years.

Recently, the University of Texas GRACE interpretations were shown to be wrong due to glacial rebound (isostasy.) A new study published in the September issue of Nature Geoscience suggested that the true melt rate might be much slower than that. A joint team of American and Dutch scientists took another look at the GRACE data and found that Greenland and West Antarctica may be melting just half as fast the earlier studies estimated. As researcher Bert Vermeersen, a professor at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, told the AFP, the earlier estimates failed to account for glacial isostatic adjustment—the rebounding of the Earth’s crust after the end of the last Ice Age. There is ‘some’ melting, but we are coming out of the Little Ice Age starting in the mid-1800s. We know that wind/currents are a significant determinant and further, recent research shows that more than half of any warming is easily chalked up to natural variability.

In April NOAA’s GIS research suggests that aerosols play a large role in Arctic warming and pointed to aerosols as the cause of recent anomalous arctic warming.

In the last two weeks, Charlie Zender, a climate physicist at the University of California, Irvine, released research saying that even at concentrations below five parts per billion—aerosols, such as soot triggers melting, and may be responsible for as much as 94 percent of Arctic warming versus CO2/warming causes.

 

[mamooth]

But Morner is ‘the’ guy on sea level rise.

No, Morner is the dowser crank that nobody pays any attention to. Not just because he walks around with a forked stick saying he can find water, but because he gets all kinds of things about sea level wrong as well.

 

[Crick]

An alarmist claiming that another warmist won a debate is entertaining to you? I suppose reading comments on a few out of context cherry picked statements might risle to the level of entertainment to you but it is just the same old reruns as far as I am concerned.

The entire text of the debate is available and that is to what I was referring. It's no that long; a ten minute read.

Again, good to know your enemies.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.....about 286 people think its a global crisis. Regular folks could care less!! Every poll displays this in definitive fashion.


Not so interesting unless you are part of the religion.

 

[skookerasbil]

Heres a far more interesting read >>>


These 5 charts show why the world is still failing on climate change - Vox


yuk......yuk......

 

[Crick]

LOL.....about 286 people think its a global crisis. Regular folks could care less!! Every poll displays this in definitive fashion.

Funny how polls are crap to you unless they show what you want them to show.

 

[Crick]

Heres a far more interesting read >>>


These 5 charts show why the world is still failing on climate change - Vox

You should define your terms. What your charts show is that we are failing to address AGW as we should. They show that YOU and your denier compatriots are, to some extent, winnning the war for the hearts and minds of the rest of the lazy, ignorant fools around the world. But then, I never had any serious hope things would turn out otherwise.

What your charts do NOT show, is any flaw in AGW or provide ANY support for your various attempts to refute it and provide some other cause for the global warming we've experienced.

What they show is how in every regard, YOU are a failure to the human race.

 

[skookerasbil]

Heres a far more interesting read >>>


These 5 charts show why the world is still failing on climate change - Vox

I disagree.

Well......we're all real proud of ya s0n!!!


Whistling past the graveyard is ghey.

 

[Crick]

Being a bigot by choice is stupid in the EXTREME.

 

[skookerasbil]

Being a bigot by choice is stupid in the EXTREME.

Anybody who doesn't agree with a far left guy is a bigot and a racist!! When they get pwned on the facts, they come out guns ablazing with this nonsense!!




They need to put that in the Geico commercial!!!

 

[IanC]

I found this fairly down in the comments section. This was an interesting read. Funny how the alarmists are squawking about a supposed 4 meter rise in seal level when the reality is at worst it will be 1' 5".


Two thoughts on above. Unsure why Hunt mention Jason Box’s arctic study, but Nils-Axel Morner was clipped (perhaps catty comment?). But Morner is ‘the’ guy on sea level rise.

With respect to John making a claim of 4+ meters for sea level rise, that’s intriguing inasmuch as the IPCC said only 3 feet in 1995, downgraded to 2’11″ in 2001 and 1’5″ in 2007. Current rise is only 1 foot/century. Morner predicted 8″ and has been the closest to date.

As far as an arctic report card as shared by Hunt, let’s consider…

From the Danish Meteorological Institute: DMI 30% Arctic extent has reached its highest number for this date, exceeding 2006. “The refreeze has been very fast.” And… we learn, that Arctic 80N-90N temperatures in the melt season this year is colder than average. This was the case last year too, while earlier years in the DMI analysis period (1958-2010) hardly ever shows Arctic melt season temperatures this cold.

From JAXA, the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency: Sea ice extent shows sharp growth, exceeding the 2009 rate, and almost as fast as 2005.

From the new peer-reviewed research “North American Summer Arctic front during 1948-2007.” International Journal of Climatology 30: 874-883. Based on their analysis, the two researchers report that “the position of the July Arctic front varies significantly through the period 1948-2007,” but they find that it does so “with a mean position similar to that found by Bryson (1966),” which “close similarity,” as they describe it, “is striking, given that the Bryson study was completed over 40 years ago.”
In other words, no real change for 40 years.

Recently, the University of Texas GRACE interpretations were shown to be wrong due to glacial rebound (isostasy.) A new study published in the September issue of Nature Geoscience suggested that the true melt rate might be much slower than that. A joint team of American and Dutch scientists took another look at the GRACE data and found that Greenland and West Antarctica may be melting just half as fast the earlier studies estimated. As researcher Bert Vermeersen, a professor at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, told the AFP, the earlier estimates failed to account for glacial isostatic adjustment—the rebounding of the Earth’s crust after the end of the last Ice Age. There is ‘some’ melting, but we are coming out of the Little Ice Age starting in the mid-1800s. We know that wind/currents are a significant determinant and further, recent research shows that more than half of any warming is easily chalked up to natural variability.

In April NOAA’s GIS research suggests that aerosols play a large role in Arctic warming and pointed to aerosols as the cause of recent anomalous arctic warming.

In the last two weeks, Charlie Zender, a climate physicist at the University of California, Irvine, released research saying that even at concentrations below five parts per billion—aerosols, such as soot triggers melting, and may be responsible for as much as 94 percent of Arctic warming versus CO2/warming causes.

yup. GRACE is a wonderful tool but the calculations are almost impossibly complex and are very hard to calibrate, especially at the beginning. I have long predicted that the numbers would come down as longer data sets make it more and more difficult to 'push' the results in the desired direction.

 

[Crick]

So, of course, you have convincing evidence that the results were being "pushed".

Personally, the folks I see attempting to "push" the results would be you and yours in your never ending effort to find SOME way to minimize the observations.