Posts by speedjunky

Global warming fingered as Superstorm Sandy supersizer

None of the climate models are 100% and I have been saying for years now, there is no such thing as man made global warming. What did I see in the Sunday Mail last night, an article with the headline,"Finally proof that there is NO global warming", it went on to state that the global temperatures are NOT rising, showed a nice pretty graph where the temperatures have levelled off for the past 15 years!!

There is no such thing as global warming, I stand by this and you will see more and more reports saying as much!

Then the question will be asked, why have we (meaning our governments) wasted billion of pounds and dollars on this rubbish and we continue to pay tax based on carbon!!!

Alarmists, go home and worry about something else instead of p!$$!ng away everyones tax money!

Greenland ice did not melt in baking +8°C era 120k years ago

Re: Is there a way I can filter out crap posts?

I like Lewis's style, he points out that this alarmist crap is not all cut and dried!

If you dont like the posts, then DONT READ THEM!!!

Simples!!

Don't panic: Arctic methane emissions have been going on for ages

Re: Oh dear.

I dont respond to COWARDS!!!

Re: Oh dear.

Food of the Gods, ha ha ha, why do you call it a documentary, I thought it was a film based on a H G Wells book?

As far as I am concerned, the earth has gone through cycles over the span of millions of years, I am not going to worry about it as there is nothing you or I can do about it.

Ok point taken then, if you insist, I accept that global warming "could" cause all sorts of issues in theory (but thats the problem with theories isn't it, they are just theories?) , BUT I wont accept that global warming is proven to be man made.

Re: Oh dear.

Big Ted,

This is rediculous, why would I entertain alarmist nonesense about what looks like might happen or possibly has happened with no actual evidence that it is going to happen? Its like you saying to me that that mutant chickens could take over the world because they mutate into 20 times their normal size and eat the rest of the world!! Rediculous drivel!!!

Also, you are making this up, with a statement like "not likely to happen any time soon", how the heck do you know???

Re: Oh dear.

Big Ted,

More alarmist nonesense caviated with in your words,"could" and "believed", with no cast iron evidence.

Error found in climate modelling: Too many droughts predicted

Re: More Lews BS

The issue here is that the camp that preach Global Warming is man made or man is contributing to global warming point to models like the one in this article. BUT, time and time again holes are found in these models. The very action of making an assumption, of which I bet there are many, means that you are incorporating a basis that is a risk to the model being correct. This is where I have a problem with all man made GW alarmist preachers, how can you trust these models?

UK ice boffin: 'Arctic melt equivalent to 20 years of CO₂'

Re: It isn't AGW

Wilco,

What evidence do you have to the contrary!??!!?

Low sunspot activity linked to rivers freezing: Mini Ice Age on way?

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

The oceans contain 37,400 billion tons (GT) of suspended carbon, land biomass has 2000-3000 GT. The atpmosphere contains 720 billion tons of CO2 and humans contribute only 6 GT additional load on this balance. The oceans, land and atpmosphere exchange CO2 continuously so the additional load by humans is incredibly small.

The graph I was pointing to was a trend graph, and it looked like it had got to the top of its cycle and was tracing horizontally, if you read my previous messages you will see which one I was pointing to. All I am getting at here is that not all is on the up and up, not all is down either, but it is most certainly not a one straight upwards!!

I am not impressed with your graph for the past 450000 years, for the following reasons:

1) It is very small considering its to show such a large timespan.

2) The blue and red lines cross significantly in such a small graph and its difficult to see what is going on.

3) Unless I have mis-understood reading the text, the temperature is an ESTIMATE of OCEAN temperatures, doesn't the Ocean temp change lag behind the ground temp?

4) The author of YOUR graph states," the determination of cause and effect remains exceedingly difficult"

Christ, so the scientists currently trying to crack Fusion should just go home then? are you always this optimistic? it must be a riot at home......oooohh CO2, ooooh we are all gonna die and there are not going to be any technological advances at all between now and the next 100 years that will affect the use of fossil fuels!! 100years is a long time and we are streets ahead with Fusion research. I reckon it will be cracked in the next 25-50yrs. Then you alarmists will have something else to moan about.....oooh the Fusion Reactors they kick out fairy dust and we will have an overload in the atmosphere which will plunge us into fairy dust global cooling!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Wilco,

I would like to add that the Kyoto agreement is a load of rubbish too, it harms industry, the man on the street etc etc, for what???? To reduce our tiny CO2 emissions (tiny compared to other sources!)!! But if we look at the maths we again are looking at reducing tiny emissions by a tiny amount....is it really going to have a warming reversal effect???? NO!! Is it going to make any difference??? Especially when it seems a fair few of the countries signed up to it wont meet their targets!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Wilco 1,

the amount of CO2 we emit IS tiny compared to other sources, however, I accept there is additional CO2 in the atmosphere, roughly 100ppm which I have said in previous posts!!

Steady, you accept my data!! Ok the graphs are good then, but I did NOT conclude that cooling is happening in general, just that some of the graphs seem to be slowing, or flat and the graph I pointed you to clearly shows the TREND getting to the top of its peak and looks like its starting to fall. I agree that some temperatures have moved up, but I argue that this still is not conclusively proven to be CO2 causing this.

You are an alarmist, and I did NOT look at 2 years of data and conclude cooling, I did actually say the slope is pointing downwards but it is NOT a trend. The likelyhood is that we wont need to rely so much on fossil fuels in the next 50-100yrs, alternatives are being sought and developed all over the place. The IPCC prediction for fossil fuel usage could be massively floored as they do not have a crystal ball and neither do I, but I suspect it wont be that long that we crack nuclear Fusion, major experiements are already going ahead! It is the alarmists that are looking at the last 100 years and stating that we will continue to burn fossil fuels at ever increased rates.....I think NOT!!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

NomNomNom,

You are releasing CO2 typing this crap!!! So you are killing your own grandchildren!!! What a load of propoganda drivel!!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Well said NSLD, I suspect there are some stereotypical Green Party alarmists here, with long beards, cords and driving a Prius!!!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

To NomNomNom (stupid name by the way!!)

"We find that water vapor is the dominant substance — responsible for about 50% of the absorption, with clouds responsible for about 25% — and CO2 responsible for 20% of the effect."

"http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05/"

Pre-industrial times we had 280ppm of CO2, now we have roughly 390ppm. CO2 is a trace substance and we are talking Parts Per Million here, the increase of one hundred (roughly speaking) parts per million in rediculously small. I still think that the models being used to generate all this scare mongering are looking for carbon to be an issue and of course will find carbon being an issue.

"Ok, lets go back to the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm, but temperatures were the same as they are today"

"Sun was fainter back then. It should have been much colder than today. CO2 made it warmer."

"http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7289/full/nature08955.html"

No NO no, unless you were around with a thermometer at that time measuring the surface of the sun then I suggest you cannot use that argument, no-one really knows the temperature of the sun, it is based on a model and an assumption that 100's of millions of years ago the sun will start fainter and gradually get brightter, if the sun was as faint as predicted then there would be no flowing water, but the evidence suggests there was, have you heard of the Faint Young Sun Paradox??? A paradox in this case would suggest that the model or theory does not quite work, something is missing!

"PLus, CO2 lags about 800 years behind temperature changes, CO2 is not the cause of higher temperatures its possibly the effect....!"

"Once CO2 starts rising temperature rises even more."

"The CO2 contribution from man is tiny and therefore its effect is TINY or not at all."

"Contribution from man is about 30 billion tons of CO2 a year. That's not tiny. Atmospheric increase is about 15 billion tons per year. Man's emission can more than explain that increase."

It is tiny compared to other sources, thats is undeniable!!! The net effect of CO2 and its impact on earth tempereratures is trumped up in models, which are likely to not know every factor that affects earth temperature, the models are no foolproof, possibly the best we have, but still not foolproof

"Man has caused atmospheric CO2 to increase by over 30% in the last 200 years. A 100% increase in CO2 is estimated to cause about 1.5C to 4.5C global warming. That would take Earth to the warmest it's been for millions of years."

Right, check out this link,

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/01/a-big-picture-look-at-earths-temperature/

I dont know if this site is credible, you will probably say not, firstly do you dispute the graphs and their figures? If not, then some comments from me:

There is no exponential rise or trend, in fact and I accept here that the trend on some graphs shows temperature rising, BUT, looking at some graphs they are level or slowing down in terms of trend (like I said above!!). We are actually on a downward slope for some of the graphs upto 2012, I appreciate this is not a trend, but cooling nonetheless.

If you look at the UAH Satellite Based Temp of the Lower Atmospehere it has a Sine Wave type shape and we are actually just commencing the downward slope in 2012, which looks like it could be a long term trend looking at earlier years!!

I still maintain you alarmists are making this up, looking too short term, using too many theories and models and not giving nature the chance to play out the cycles that it has performed for 1000's or millions of years!!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Absolute rubbish, water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect, the contribution from man is absolutely minimal, .

Ok, lets go back to the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm, but temperatures were the same as they are today....so if we are only at 380ppm then do we really have something to worry about. I think not.

PLus, CO2 lags about 800 years behind temperature changes, CO2 is not the cause of higher temperatures its possibly the effect....!

Why dont you go back to reading up on climate research and take an open view on things. The CO2 contribution from man is tiny and therefore its effect is TINY or not at all. As said above man contributes 3% to CO2 emissions, add on to this that the contribution of ALL CO2 in the atmospehere to heat retention is 3.6%, then the contribution of man is 3% of 3.6%, negligable....the maths cannot be denied unless you alarmists want to stick your heads in the sand about the basic facts!!!

Re: Climate change

More alarmist rubbish!!! All you hear from you guys is "if", "maybe", "possibly", because its all guesswork.

Why do the alarmists and scientists harp on about the shrinking Artic Ice Cap, when the Antarctic is growing!??!?! The whole climate thing is a massive natural process that man can do nothing about, nor should we try.

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

catprog....Whhhat?!?!? So you are telling me that nature differentiates between natural CO2 and Manmade CO2 then, or are you telling me that what man outputs is just pushing the natural absorbing process to over capacity!!? You alarmists are making this up as you go along!!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

You want to check you facts mate, check out the HadCRUT figures, which look at a more meaningful sea temps. Not that any of the temp measurements and "extrapolations" are 100% foolproof, but if you disagree point me to your oracle of temperatures that is so GUARANTEED to be correct?

Sigh, did you do any maths at school, even though the CO2 accumulates, the contribution from man made CO2 is still tiny!!! I appreciate this contribution from man accumulates, but the accumulation of other sources is still miles bigger!!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Look, get back in your box, it is scaremongering people like you that believe anything you read quoting the last rubbish from the scientific community and taking it as absolutely fact....

99% of scientists do not agree, I dont know where you get you figures from. 96.5% of all carbon dioxide emissions are from natural sources, mankind is responsible for only 3.5%, with 0.6% coming from fuel to move vehicles, and about 1% from fuel to heat buildings. Man made CO2 again I re-iterate is tiny in comparison to other sources and the effect is even smaller alongside other greenhouse gases, even if CO2 is a long term gas.

We are actually in a global cooling phase (the temperature trend is cooling!), so taking your last paragraph....YES you are correct, thanks for that!

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Whether I have convinced you I couldn't care less.

Firstly, you refer to ALL those climate scientists, actually not ALL of them agree that man made CO2 has a significant effect. Secondly, yes indeed, you see in many places all this talk about CO2, and no I dont presume for one minute that the sun has been forgotten about, but there seems to be far too much emphasis on man made CO2 with the latest theory of trumped up model to match the theory.

You are funny by the way.....ha ha

Re: Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Get back to me when you can spell!!

Manmade CO2 significantly affecting the climate is rubbish

Man made CO2 significantly affecting the climate is a load of rubbush, the amount of C02 in the atmosphere is 0.13%, then take into account that man made CO2 is a fraction of the aforementioned 0.13% fraction, in other words a fraction of an already small fraction. Plus, CO2 is not the worst greenhouse gas, doesn't it stand to reason that the biggest factors for global warming will not be CO2, but more likely water vapour and even more likely the vast fireball at the centre of our solar system which is 1,000,000 times the size of our earth!!!??!

More likely CO2 causing significant issues has been invented by mistaken scientists and jumped upon by governments so that can find yet another way to tax us all!!!

The earth has heated and cooled in cycles over millions of years...always has, always will!!

Broadband speed testers fail the test

Oh how wonderful life is for Anonymous Coward then......

So let me get this straigtht, I have just read your post above telling us how wonderful life is in Brighton and you get such a wonderful connection, well bully for you!!!

There some of us that read the advert and it says 10Mb connection, now forgive me for being plain naive here, but when an advert says 10Mb, the customer should possibly expect 10Meg?....the ad doesn't say,"oh expect 10 Meg when your in Brighton, but everyone else who bit torrents or actually uses their connection will be throttled to 0.2Meg because you have been so cheeky enough to actually use our infrastructure, you naughty person. Oh an if your a torrent downloader you will get 0.1 meg!!"

If the people complaining about the VM service are the minority then why is hardly anyone except you piping up in VM's defence!!!!!?!

My service grinds to a halt in the evening, and it is not wireless's fault as my network is all gigabit hard wired up to the router.

Oh in reply to your other comment about switching, as per most of these F**King ISP's, they lie to you in the adverts, then they tie you in to their sh!te service for a year......otherwise I would switch tomorrow!!!

VM's service is cr@p!!!

I have the 10Meg service with VM. 10 Meg is a joke description. In the evenings this can get as slow as 5k/sec or less, it makes browsing unusable as at literally it takes minutes to get to ONE average HTML page on the net.

Like someone says above, a 50Meg service as long as you dont use it!!!