Posts by Leslie Graham

Far out: Dark matter bridges millions of light-years long spotted between galaxies

Re: Webs!!!

"...It's the only thing the star goat is frightened of...."

I think the Flying Spaghetti Monster could take Cosmic Star Goat in a square go.

Re: The assumption that it's matter

You blasphemers.The Cosmic Star Goat is a recent usurper.

The one true God is the Flying Spaghetti Monster. May you be touched by His noodly appendage.

http://spaghettimonster.com/church-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster-founded/the-gospel-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster/

Repent.

Re: The assumption that it's matter

We are all very much looking forward to seeing your published results.

Wannabe Prime Minister Andrea Leadsom thinks all websites should be rated – just like movies

Re: Stupid thinking similar to Donald Drump

There are now well over a billion websites and another couple of thousand have been added in the time it took you to read this sentence.

Spending just ten minutes checking each one would take one man over 19,000 years to work his way through them all.

And that's just the practicalities. Who gave her the right to decide what I can and can not view on the internet? Maybe she would be better employed working for the North Koreans.

One has to wonder at the sanity of a person who would even suggest such a thing. Not even taking into account the morality of the enterprise and who would decide and what would be censored but purely from a practical point of view the logistics are simply impossible.

I have just worked out that it would take one man 19,000 years to check out every website even just spending a few minutes on each one.

I think she would be better employed doing the ironing and not worrying her pretty little head about running the country.

Re: Andrea Leadsom...

And spent the rest of the time engineering an unmitigated cultural and economic disaster from which the UK has never recovered. Not to mention she lost The Falklands through sheer incompetence which lead to the loss of hundreds of lives in order to get it back.

Worst PM in UK history.

Blocking out the Sun won't fix climate change – but it could buy us time

Re: Utter Tosh

It has been known and understood that 'CO2 keeps the planet warm and any further emissions will cause warming' for around 118 years now.

In fact it has been known that it keeps the Earth warm even longer than that, Fourier figured it out in around 1840 if I remember my high school lessons correctly.

By the 1950's it was solid mainstream science and it has remained so ever since.

I don't know where on Earth you get the idea that this is incorrect.

Perhaps you could cite the scientific research that led you to believe this?

I would be interested to read it myself.

Re: Refreeze the poles?

You know I am sometimes genuinely curious as to where on Earth deniers get these ridiculous myths and memes from? Is it from some sordid little denier-p0rn blog or do you just make them up yourselves?

They bear not the faintest relationship to reality - and it' a reality that can be accessed in seconds, free of charge, 24/7.

For example you could just visit the NSIDC site where you could read the following:

"Arctic sea ice extent for October 2015 averaged 7.72 million square kilometers (2.98 million square miles), the sixth lowest October in the satellite record. This is 1.19 million square kilometers (460,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average extent"

And: "Through 2015, the October sea ice extent has declined 6.9% per decade over the satellite record."

And: "Sea ice in Antarctica is near average"

And: [In Greenland] "Comparing the seasonal progression of the four most recent years, the recent tendency for greater-than-average melt extent is apparent. This plot also shows the rapid increase in total melt area seen in July, increasing at a rate similar to the record melt year 2012. Greenland’s 2015 melt extent area total was approximately 85,000 square kilometers (32,800 square miles) above the 1981 to 2010 average"

Antarctica is also losing mass at an accelerating rate.

Between 1992 and 2001, ice was melting from the two main ice sheets at a rate of about 64 Gt a year.

From 2002 to 2011, the ice sheets were melting at a rate of about 362 Gt a year – an almost six-fold increase.

Vanished global warming may not return – UK Met Office

What desperate and laughable garbage from the Register.

The slight slow down in the rate of warming is well and truly over now.

Global temperatures today - yes today - are now warmer than during the Holocene Thermal Optimum over 6000 years ago and already approaching the levels of the Eemian Period over 110,000 years ago.

The myth of the 'pause' is now totaly busted.

Time to face simple observable reality.

'Sunspots drive climate change' theory is result of ancient error

Re: Deniers?

Oh perleeese.

The word denier dates from the 15th century and simply means 'one who denies'.

Its shorthand for "people who persist in denying that global warming is happening, and primarily driven by human-emitted greenhouse gases, and is likely to be very disruptive, all in the face of an overwhelming consensus of expert scientific opinion, which in turn is based on a mountain of convergent evidence."

That's sort of a mouthful, so "denier" will just have to do.

The dictionary definition is equaly damning of deniers:

"...Denialism is the employment of rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none. These false arguments are used when one has few or no facts to support one's viewpoint against a scientific consensus or against overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They are effective in distracting from actual useful debate using emotionally appealing, but ultimately empty and illogical assertions...."

That definition fits climate change deniers to an absolute 'T'.

There is simply no other word in the English language that is more apt.

The attempt by deniers to falsely equate the term with the Neo-nazi holocaust deniers is disgusting. It is as cowardly as it is disingenuous.

Though since the deniers have brought it up I have to point out that the evidence for man-made global warming is as final as the evidence of Auschwitz

If the cap fits wear it and spare us your faux outrage.

Tesla reveals Powerwall battery packs for homes, Powerpacks for cities

Re: Half the world excluded from this

You don't have to air-con the whole house to keep a little box cool. You just need a super-insulated box with a little air-con inside it.

Basicaly it's like keeping it in the fridge. And seeing as you will be getting unlimited free electricity whats the problem.

Oh right - there's no problem - just someone who can't stand it that those stupid cuffing hippies have been proved right yet again. Solar is simply a no-brainer for preventing global warming and stupid cuffing hippes lime me have been saying that for nearly 30 years now.

Finaly.

Stop climate change by drinking Coca-Cola says Oz government

Re: Carbon sequestration?

It has been calculated that humans would have to plant an area the size of Texas every year for ever to balance out the 35 Billion tonnes of CO2 we are currently pumping into our wafer thin atmosphere every year.

I am all for planting trees - in fact I made a career out of woodland management and design - but it's not going to happen.

Simple.

Antarctic ice THICKER than first feared – penguin-bot boffins

With fewer and fewer straws to grasp at for denying the totaly obvious warming of the global climate system, climate change deniers have even resorted to pointing at the expanding veil of sea ice near Antarctica as ‘proof' that global warming is a 'communist hoax' or 'a scam' or whatever absurd conspiracy theory is doing the rounds of the denierblogs this week!

Back in the real world, the last time the cold waters from a rapid Antarctic land ice melt formed a ocean surface skin of easily frozen fresh water, below-surface warmth ran beneath the ice and rapidly melted sea-fronting glaciers, leading to a sea level rise of about 14 feet in just one century.

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140929/ncomms6107/full/ncomms6107.html

Remember - the climate has always changed.

It only takes the tiniest nudge.

Fact:

Between 1992 and 2001, ice was melting from the two main ice sheets at a rate of about 64 Gt a year.

From 2002 to 2011, the ice sheets were melting at a rate of about 362 Gt a year – an almost six-fold increase.

The Antarctic ocean is gaining 32Gt of temporary winter sea surface ice a year - 1% per decade.

Holland et al, J Climate (2014)

The maths isn't difficult.

Land ice losing 362GT per year.

Sea ice gaining 32Gt per year as a result.

Is it any wonder there is more ice in the seas surrounding Antarctica when there is 362 cubic kilometres melting into it every year now.

If you are not 'alarmed' by these figures then you're clearly not paying attention.

Re: Ah...

Indeed - the implied message is obvious.

But basicaly all this means is that we now have a more accurate measuring device which can access difficullt areas and the data updaptes the previous estimates. Good news.

The bad news is that Antartica is now losing ice at 6 times the rate it was just 15 years ago.

Between 1992 and 2001, ice was melting from the two main ice sheets at a rate of about 64 Gt a year.

From 2002 to 2011, the ice sheets were melting at a rate of about 362 Gt a year – an almost six-fold increase.

The Antarctic ocean is gaining 32Gt of temporary winter sea surface ice a year - 1% per decade.

Holland et al, J Climate (2014)

The maths isn't difficult.

Land ice losing 362GT per year.

Sea ice gaining 32Gt per year as a result of all that fresh water floating on top of the more saline water.

Antarctic ice at all time high: We have more to learn, says boffin

Standard 'denial for beginners' nonsense.

The warming has accelerated over the last 17 years - the deniers trick of selecting the RSS surface temps only graph and the one that doesn't even include the Arctic at that, let alone the oceans - and then cherry picking the very peak temperature of the Super El Nino year of 1998 as the start point for a statisticaly meaningless time period.,.... I mean really?

You really seriously believe that the bulk of the world's people are so stupid they are going to fall for THAT!

It's just insulting. Apart from this obvious and transparant attempt to deceive its moot anyway as both 2005 and 2010 were hotter than even the Super El Nino year.

Globaly, 2014 is, so far, the hottest year on record.

"...An unprecedented rise in global ocean temperatures contributed toward making the summer of 2014 the hottest on record, according to a report published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA. The reading puts the entire year on track to become the hottest ever since records began.

From June through August, the average global temperature was 62.7 degrees Fahrenheit, which is 1.28 degrees higher than the 20th-century average. The global sea surface temperature was 1.17 degrees Fahrenheit above the previous century's average of 61.4 degrees, breaking the previous all-time high set in June. This, according to the report, made not only the month of August the hottest August since records began in 1880, it also made the summer of 2014 the hottest ever.

The report stated that record-high temperatures were reported not only during the summers in the northern hemisphere, but also during the winters in the southern hemisphere during the months of June, July and August. During these three months, the winters in the southern hemisphere were the fourth warmest on record.

http://www.ibtimes.com/summer-2014-was-hottest-ever-noaa-report-1692348

At least try to come up with some new rubbish. These same old discredited and thousand-times-falsified myths and memes are no longer irritating - they're just boring.

The earth is losing a trillion tons of ice per year:

- 159 Gt Antarctic LAND ice volume.........McMillan el al, GRL (2014)

+ 26 Gt Antarctic SEA ice volume............Holland et al, J Climate (2014)

- 261 Gt Arctic sea ice................................PIOMAS

- 378 Gt Greenland, Enderlin et al.............GRL (2014)

- 259 Gt other land based glaciers............Gardner et al. Science (2013)

TOTAL ICE LOSS PER YEAR = 1,031 Gt.

In fact, even the increase in seasonal Antarctic sea ice was predicted by Manabe et al 1991, nearly 25 years ago so t osay 'scientists are baffled' is ridiculous.

And, of course, the melt is accelerating as global temperatures continue to rise. And make no mistake - the laws of physics did NOT magicaly cease to apply to the radiative properties of the CO2 molecule in July 1998 no matter how much the carbon corporation's propaganda machine tries to insist they did.

Between 1997 and 2003 Greenland was losing ice at 83 cubic kilometres a year. From 2003 to 2009 it was up to 153 cubic kilometres a year.

Last year, using 14.3 million data points across Greenland collected by CryoSat, the research team were able to show it was up to an extraordinary 378 cubic kilometres per year - nearly 5 times faster than just a decade ago.

If you think that's bad - or even if you don't - check out Antarctica.

Antarctica is also losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

The 159 Kt loss reported by the McMillan el al study is the long term average which obscures the detail.

Between 1992 and 2001, ice was melting from the two main ice sheets at a rate of about 64 Gt a year.

From 2002 to 2011, the ice sheets were melting at a rate of about 362 Gt a year – an almost six-fold increase.

With 362 Gt of ice sliding or melting into the surrounding sea it's hardly surprising that there is an extra 32 Gt floating around is it?

But the ice melt is the least of the problems that global warming is causing.

Far more immediate will be the crop losses due to droughts and floods and the damage to the global economy - as we can already see. Well - most of us can.

Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees

Lilley is the director of an oil company and has an economics degree.

Stringer has a 40 year old BSc in Chemistry from Sheffield.

LOL.

Are you people for real?!

If these two wretched charlatans want to lobby for their carbon corporation sponsers then that is their right. But for The Register to big them up on the grounds of a 1971 BSc in Chemistry and a degree in economics is just insulting to the intelligence of their readers.

Even if they WERE remotely qualified in the climate science related disciplines it is still perfectly obvious why they were the only two out of thirteen people to vote against a perfectly legitimate motion.

Just disgusting self-interest. This will not go unrecorded.

Most Americans doubt Big Bang, not too sure about evolution, climate change – survey

Re: IMG Breaking News!!

There is no doubt that the more religious an American is the more likely he is to be a climate change denier.

There are literaly dozens of surveys which prove this.

Sure - not *every* climate change denier is a religious whackjob but just about every religious whackjob is a climate change denier.

And I don't have a dog in this fight - it's just a proven fact.

And I think you need to read up the definition of a "Representative Sample" before you make any more vacuous remarks about sample size.

Re: Breaking News!!

The current rapid warming has got nothing to do with past natural cycles.

Your's is just another variation on the wearisome "The climate's changed before" (TM) meme.

Well no **** Sherlock. Who would have thought it?

And who told you anyway? Oh yeah - those same thousands of climate scientists who are also telling us that the current warming has nothing to do with any natural cycle.

ALL the natural forcings and cycles are currently in the negative. ALL of them.

The Milankovitch cycles - both orbital and axia.

The sun's TSI cycle - now at the lowest for a century and falling since 1950 while temperatures soared.

The aerosol global dimming - now at it's highest thanks to China and India.

The PDO - in the negative since 1998.

Volcanic activity - slightly higher than average - should be having a cooling effect.

And yet the Earth is still warming with the Arctic and the oceans warming fastest of all.

In the past every time a Milankovitch Cycle triggered an outgassing of CO2 the Earth warmed.

Every single time.

The laws of physics dont care WHERE the extra 40% of heat-trapping gas has come from - they just do their thing anyway.

CO2 levels rise - the Earth warms.

Always has - always will.

If you have a scintilla of evidence of some magical invisible 'natural' forcing cycle that tens of thousands of scientists can't see but - amazingly you can then tell us - WHAT IS IT?

You could be on for the Nobel Prize and global hero status if you can show us.

Re: Breaking News!!

It's not that Americans are any more stupid than any other race - it's that they are poorly informed.

We need to greatly improve science education at every level and keep religion and supertitions out of the classroom.

Some of the more extreme religious indoctrination of young children is nothing short of child abuse.

Children should be kept free of religious dogma until they are of an age when they can make informed decisions about whether Jesus rode dinosaurs and suchlike claims.

Toddlers will accept just about anything their parents tell them and in America - it shows

HIDDEN OCEAN of LIVING SOUP found on Enceladus, moon of Saturn

This is a study from NASA's so called "scientists". Surely you know that they always fudge the data to get the results they want. This planet does not exist - it is another communist hoax by liberals and "scientists" to get more billions in grant money to support their luxury lifestyles.

The government will just use this as an excuse to raise taxes.

Antarctic glacier 'melted just as fast Long before human carbon emissions'

Re: Well humans where around 8000 years ago

Ah yes - people died from cancer long before cigarettes were invented so smoking can't cause cancer.

Are you people for real.

This study just demonstrates how easy it is for us to melt the glaciers - as we are doing.

It is already warmer now than it was 8,000 years ago and it's not going to stop here.

Climate change made sea levels fall in 2010 and 2011

Re: So

Are you really taht confused or are you just being deliberately obtuse.

The sea level fell temporarily because the flooding on Australia (and South America) was so enormous that it actualy lowered ocean content.

That was one of the many extreme weather events of that year.

It is yet more evidence that the extreme weather events are increasing as the Earth warms.

It's simply common sense apart from anything else that as the Earth warms the atmoshere will hold more water (it is already up 4% on 30 years ago) and that water will have to fall somewhere.

Now that climate change is simply obvious the denial has become desperate - just silly even.

Re: I'm sure that there'l be a variety of amusing commentary here ...

Yes - 66% of people writing about gravity wouldn't say they believe gravity exists either.

What's your point?

Almost every paper that did express a view concurred with the consensus though.

The denial industry might have one or two memes that sound convincing but on this issue they just sound desperate - insane almost.

There is a near unanimous consensus of evidence ( not opinions you'll notice) that the Earth is warming and that the 40% increase in the atmospheric concentrations of a known greenhouse gas is the primary cause.

That is a simple proven fact.

Get used to it.

Re: I'm sure that there'l be a variety of amusing commentary here ...

There have been FIVE major studies and surveys of the literature in the last decade and every sinlg eone of them shows the same figure of around 97% to 99%.

No sane person pretends there is no consensus. In fact no-one ever did until the carbon corporations were advised to "always attack the consensus" by Frank Luntz - the top spin doctor in the world at the time.

Incidentily, Frank Luntz now says he deeply regrets helping the denial industry and accepts what the science is showing us.

There is absolutely nothing 'normal' about the global climate changing 100 times faster than at any time in Earth's history outside of a meteor hit.

And just so as you know - the icredible floodsin Australia (I was there) that led to the appearance of an 'inland sea' have now drained back into the oceans and the rise is now back above trend at 3.17mm per year while the level itself is at an all time high - and rising.

This is old news anyway - this story broke well over a year ago.

US Republican enviro-vets: 'Climate change is real. Deal with it'

Re: Utter tosh

What desperate nonsense.

You are seriously claiming that the Arctic isn't melting and then expect to be taken seriously in your other parrotted denierblog junk?

Laughable.

The last decade IS by far the hottest decade in at least 7,000 years.

Simple, measurable, verifiable fact.

http://planet3.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/marcott-B-1000-500x342.jpg

The deep oceans ARE warming rapidly.

Simple measurable fact from thousands of ARGO bouys.

http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/images/AR4WG1SeaSurfaceTemp.jpg?711122

Sea level IS rising.

Simple measurement.

http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/news/ocean-indicators/mean-sea-level/

80% of summer Arctic ice volume has melted in the last 35 years.

Simple measurement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YgiMBxaL19M

There are hundreds of other studies that all confirm these examples.

There are none that refute them.

That you can post such utter rubbish with a straight face when it's so blatantly obvious you are talking the most absurd tosh is classic denier tactic. You have no shame whatsoever.

Re: @ Burb - @ AC 0647hGMT - Whatever.

So - you don't have any proof whatsoever. What a surprise.

Typical denier tactic. Just make something up, repeat it ad nauseum, ignore requests for evidence, claim victory, make something else up, repeat that add nauseum etc etc etc etc.

There are NO 'lists' of qualified climate scientists who dispute AGW because there aren't any qualified climate scientists who dispute AGW.

The denial industry have even resorted to faking online polls that anyone with a degree is entitled to sign and then claiming that as 'evidence'.

I kid you not - google 'Oregon Petition' if you doubt me. It's a motley list of assorted engineers, chemists and bottle-washers with a smattering of pop-singers and even one imaginary TV detective included!

This is the sort of utter junk that the denial industry offer as 'proof'. Do you really think they would pull stunts like that if they had any genuine proof?

Pathetic and desperate in equal measure,.

Now that climate change is simply obvious and even the Republicans are begining to realise that ignorance is a vote loser the denial from the ignorati has become hysterical. Classic psychological reaction.

Re: @ AC 0647hGMT - Whatever.

There are NO climate "scientists who say the opposite". Or they so vanishlingly small in number as to be irrelevant. You always get a couple of cranks in any crowd.

Even 'skeptics' like John Christie and Roy Spencer don't dispute that CO2 is causing global warming. They just didn't think it was going to happen as fast as it.

The denial industry have made it a priority to attack the consensus and spend millions of dollars spreading misinformation to that effect. They don't have to do any research so a few million bucks buys a LOT of lies.

You have obviously fallen victim to some of these lies.

If the denial industry had any proof that the near unanimous consensus wasn't a fact they would cite it.

But of course they cant'. All they can do is wheel out the same tiny handfull of shills and fake 'experts' over and over again. These people have become household names due to their extreme rarity and the fact that the same few are paraded repeatedly.

Stop parrotting the same old thousand-times-faslsified denierblog junk. We don't have time for flat earthers any longer.

Re: Whatever.

"We do not know why".

What ridiculous drivel. OF COURSE we know why!

Just because YOU don't know the schoolboy basics doesn't mean everyone else is ignorant too.

We have known all the main forcings for climate change for decades - well over a century in the case of variations in CO2 levels.

We have known that CO2 is a 'greenhouse gas' since 1896 and it was long-suspected before that.

By the time G N Plass published "The CO2 theory of climate change" in 1956 it was already mainstream science and every study since then has only served to reinforce the theory. There is now a consensus of evidence and it is a 'robust theory'. Which in laymans terms translates to a scientific fact. It is as much a fact as the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution.

Deal with it.

The other forcings such as the orbital and axial variations that result in the Milankovitch Cycles, the variations in sun activity and the cooling effect of volcanic eruptions are also well understood and have been for decades.

In the distant past - every sinle time CO2 levels have risen as a result of the Milankovitch Cycles so has the global temperature. The laws of physics don't care if the CO2 is outgassing from some ancient ocean or is coming from humans burning 35 billion tons of fossil fuels every year. They just do their thing regardless.

Every single time.

Decade to 2010 was hottest, wettest: WMO

Dear oh dear.

Not the old "the climate's changed before" meme. Can't you do better than that?

It's important to know there are a number of different forces acting on the Earth’s climate. When the sun gets brighter, the planet receives more energy and warms. When volcanoes erupt, they emit particles into the atmosphere which reflect sunlight, and the planet cools. When there are more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the planet warms. It's worth remembering that without some greenhouse gas the Earth would be a ball of ice.

These forces are called "forcings" because they force changes in the global average temperature.

Looking at the past gives us insight into how our climate responds to such forcings. Using ice cores, for instance, we can work out past temperature changes, the level of solar activity, and the amount of greenhouse gases and volcanic dust in the atmosphere. Looking at many different periods and timescales including many thousands of years ago we've learned that when the Earth gains heat, glaciers and sea ice melt resulting in a positive feedbacks that amplify the warming. There are other positive feedbacks as well and this is why the planet has experienced such dramatic changes in temperature in the past.

In summary the past reveals our climate is highly sensitive to small changes in heat.

What does that mean for today? Over the past 150 years greenhouse gas levels have increased 40 percent mainly from burning of fossil fuels. This additional "forcing" is warming the planet more than it has in thousands of years. From Earth's history, we know that positive feedbacks will amplify this additional warming.

The Earth's climate has changed in the past and ice cores and other measures tell us why. Based on this knowledge, and other types of evidence we know the human emissions of greenhouse gases are warming the climate

Re: Numbers?

Nuclear is a horse that been dead for years. We don't need it and we can't afford it and we have no idea what to do with the 300,000 tons of nuclear waste we've already had in 'temporary storage' for the last 50 years. The only people still psuging for that filthy dinosaur technology are the people who sell it - and the gullible dupes ignorant enough to fall for the old BS.

There is enough solar energy hits this planet in an hour to power all of humanity for a year.

You really think it is beyond the wit of man to harness about 0.0001% of it.

We already have the technology, the space and the free thermo-nuclear reactor.

The only thing stopping us is the political will and the vested interests in the carbon industry.

Planetary data merge shows three Earth-like planets in close star system

It says 'mass' not 'size'.

It could be one thousandth of the size of Earth and still have a greater mass. Depends on the density.

Washout 2012 summer, melty Greenland 'nothing to do with Arctic ice or warm oceans'

Report says the opposite of your claim.

"Taken together, our present results strongly suggest that the main forcing of the extreme GrIS surface melt in July 2012 was atmospheric, linked with changes in the summer North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), Greenland Blocking Index and polar jet stream which favoured southerly warm air advection along the western coast."

The GBI index and changes to the polar jet stream are the result of the Arctic melt, which is of course the result of global warmng. The NAO is also a warm ocean current oscilation

That you somehow manage to tortuously twist this information into a headline that says exactly the opposite is typical of the denialist cult's tactics and doesn't fool anybody except those who want to be fooled.

Shame on you yet again.

Google's Schmidt calls climate-change deniers 'liars'

Re: What's his angle?

"...One active volcano outputs more CO2 with one eruption than mankind has since the industrial revolution,,,"

Complete and utter denierblog garbage. Just laughable nonsense as any ten year old could tell you.

Humans emit 100 times more CO2 than all the Earth's volcanos - both surface and subsea - combined.

Volcanos = on averge 300 million tons per annum

Humans = 35 BILLION tons per annum.

This is a simple observable measurable fact that anyone can look up in seconds.

This 'volcanos meme' is usefull for showing up the jaw-dropping ignorance and gullibility of some of the more extreme denialist cult devotees. It is so completely obvious that it is total junk that it hardly even merits a serious reply.

It orginates in Ian Plimers laughable 'book' (like a lot of the deniermyths' but even he doesn't say that. He was refering to the Siberian Traps volcanic event - the largest known volcanic event of the last 500 million years of Earth's geological history.

They continued for a MILLION years and spanned the Permian–Triassic boundary, about 251 to 250 million years ago.

That the denia machine have somehow managed to twist this even into the 'volcanos meme' is bad enough but the fact that there are a few mind-meltingly ill-informed bozos out there who not only fall for this junk but make idiots of themselves by repeating it - well - it's just shaming to the whole country.

At least get yourself familar with the absolute basics because as it stands your ignorance is an embarrasment even to the denial industry.

Climate change forces women into prostitution - US politicians

Re: End of the last Ice Age == Population explosion

Global warming doesn't mean "warmer weather". It means more energy in the system therefore more extremes.

Simple physics. Some dry areas will get much drier, some cool areas will get colder and some wet areas will have more floods.

Every recent study suggests that the climate change resulting from global warming (which contrary to the ridiculous nonsense being parrotted by the ill-informed and gullible has accelerated over the last 15 years) will lead to reductions in harvests and a rise in food prices.

Pretty much what is already happening.

Antarctic ice sheet melt 'not that unusual', latest ice core shows

Read the research paper not the denierblog version.

What thex research paper itself actualy says is:

"Summer melting is now at a level that is unprecedented over the past 1,000 years. We conclude that ice on the Antarctic Peninsula is now particularly susceptible to rapid increases in melting and loss"

What the denial industry says is: "nothing to see here folks".

What a surprise.

Just how stupid do you have to be to believe a fossil fuel funded denierblog telling us that fossil fuels are harmless?

Melting is unprecedented for at least the last 1000 years.

Another bare-faced flat out lie from the denial machine.

What the research paper ACTUALY SAYS is:

"...Summer melting is now at a level that is unprecedented over the past 1,000 years. We conclude that ice on the Antarctic Peninsula is now particularly susceptible to rapid increases in melting and loss..."

And yet The Register somehow manages to twist this simple statement of fact into 'nothing to see here folks' Just how stupid do you have to be to fall for this junk week in week out?

World+Dog don't care about climate change, never have done

Climate change will cut your wages

Whilst it's obviously not true that most people don't care about climate change it obviously IS true that everyone WILL care as soon as climate change starts to affect their standard of living.

The first thing climate change is going to wreck IS the economy stupid.

It has already cost thousands of people their jobs in Plainview, Texas just for starters.

The South East is going to see more and more of these droughts in the coming decades and the North East will see more and more superstorms like Sandy. That is going to cost hundreds of millions of people an awfull lot of money. And then it is going to start getting bad. Then you will hear the denialist cult devotees whinging "Why didn't the scientists warn us?".

Inside the new climate row as Mystic Met Office goes cool on warming

It's just a breathing space

At the end of the day (or century) it doesn't make a whit of difference if the warming slows down for a few years due to natural forcings all being currently in the negative or not.

Sooner or later the warming will obviously return to trend or above trend. That much is the inevitable result of the laws of physics and the passage of time.

Whether this happens in 2017 or 2027 or even 2037 is irrelevant to all except perhaps people in their 70's and 80's.

Climate change is still going to trash the economy and probably set our civilisation back centuries. And that's if we're lucky.

Re: the underlying trend

Actualy we do.

If you remove ENSO, volcanoes and TSI the rise in temperatures is almost perfectly linear.

There is no doubt that the underlying trend is warming steadily.

How can it possibly not be? It would mean that everything we understand about the basic laws of physics would have to be wrong.

By the way - can anyone explain how the Arctic Ice Volume has fallen by 70% in the last 25 years if the worled isn't warming?

Whatever the natural forcings and cycles that are masking the underlying trend they work both ways and will eventuraly accelerate the warming - obviously.

And past climate change and the causes are not relevant to todays AGW. And screw 'surviving' - I want to stay rich, fat and comfortable thank you. Climate change is going to wreck the world's economy before anything else.

New science upsets calculations on sea level rise, climate change

Re: Tiny correction

Such idiotic rants merely reveal your ignorance of the scientific method.

Science deals in the balance of probability not 'proof'.

It is now 99.99% probable that human emesions of GHG are causing the temperature to rise. It can never be 'proved' any more than evolution can be 'proved'.

If you - or anyone else for that matter - had a scintilla of evidence that suggested it isn't then you would show it.

But you can't. Because there are no peer-reviewed studies published in the last decade that show any such thing.

There is another theory I've heard about. "Heat melts ice".

I can't 'prove it' of course. No-one can. It;s 'just a theory' like any other.

Antarcitc ice cap is NOT "growing".

The Antarctic ice cap is not growing as stated in the article.

It is losing mass at an accelerating rate.

It's true that over the last decade the annual maximum extent of temporary Antarctic SEA ice has increased by 1% due to changes in wind patterns and decreases in salinity due to increased rain and snowfall but the land ice is melting.

Please don't confuse the two in future as it undermines the credibility of the sceptic argument.

Last month ties for WARMEST September on RECORD

Re: Nice graph, however...

No-one predicted an 'exponential curve'. That's just a tired old strawman from the denial industry.

Stop making stuff up.

There have been around a dozen periods during the last century when climate forcings have appeared to slow down warming. In the 40's and 50's sulphur emssions slowed it down for THIRTY YEARS before it reverted to trend again. What you are looking at is noise in the system and even then most of the heat is going into the oceans and into melting Arctic sea ice. Even the Antarctic is now being affected by extra snow and rain - as the increasing Antarctic sea ice extent as the surface becmomes less saline clearly shows.

It's just amazing that there are still some people ignorant and gullible enough to fall for such blatant propaganda from vested interests. Unfortunately recent events show that no matter how obvious AGW becomes the ignorati will still refuse to accept the simple reality that is happening right in front of the noses.

Tragic.

Re: Color me dubious, color me green...

Heh heh.

That's all you've got isn't it? YOiu have absoulutely no answer to the simple fact that three major peer-reviewed studies involving THOUSANDS of climate scientists ALL show that climate scientists are near unanimous in their findings that AGW is happening.

All you have in reply is to try to imply that there was something wrong witht he studies methodology.

Desperate and pathetic lies. I've even seen "it was only a survey of 72 scientists!" (I kid you not)

The actual numbers were over 3400 for one of them and around 1400 for another.

There are around 130,000 peer-reviewed studies in the archives and not one of them - NOT A SINGLE ONE of them - shows any evidence whatsoever that AGW is not occurring.

Endlessly parroting - "They are all rigged! just reveals you have no answer and in fact just makes you look stupid.

Himalayan glaciers actually gaining ice, space scans show

Re: Hmmm, I'm beginning to see a trend

If you want to see a trend in the Arctic Ice don't pick one month's extent data in one small part of the Arctic.

That just makes you look like a denier.

Instead look at the TREND. The trend - and this is just a simply matter of measuring it - is a rapid retreat in all Arctic regions in extent, area, volume and age.

By the way - the thin scattered slush in the Bering Sea that the denier-blogs are peeing in their pants over has largely been blown out there or formed in the last few weeks and will be entirely gone by June. Anyone with even a basic interest in the subject is well aware of this.

What is important is the shocking decline in the volume of ice and the disapearance of almost all of the old ice.

It's disapearing some 40 years ahead of the IPCC worst case projections of only a decade ago.

That's the problem with these "uncertainties" the ...er..."skepticks"... like to crow about. They can work both ways as we are now seeing.

Re: Look at history (geological that is)

"...There has been more CO2 in the air and less etc.etc. What we're seeing here has all happened before..."

There has never been this high level of CO2 in the atmosphere in the history of human evolution.

Last time it was this high the planet was so hot it was unfit for human habitation.

The climate doesn't care where the CO2 comes from. Whether it's because of a natural Milankovitch Cycle thawing the permafrost or humans burning 29 billion tons of fossil fuels per year. It heats up just the same.

You're right - it's all happened before - over and over again.

CO2 levels go up - so does the global temperature. Every damn time so far.

What makes you think it isn't going to happen this time?

Peer-reviewed science papers only please.

By the way - the last time the temperature changed at one thousandth of the speed it is changing now there was a mass extinction of 90% of all life on Earth. On the land and in the oceans.

Nature doesn't **** around and we are poking her with a stick.

Re: Here we have

"...Lewis Page flying yet again in the face of a multi billion $ industry and expecting to be taken seriously...."

The combined proven assets of the fossil fuel industry is TWENTY SEVEN TRILLION DOLLARS.

Fossil fuels are subsidised globaly to the tune of 420 BILLION DOLLARS per year.

So please - enough with this ridiculous "scientists are only saying this for the money" nonsense. It's simply insulting to everyone on both 'sides' of the debate. Grow up. Show us your scientific references for your position and refrain from making libelous and completely unsubstantiated assertions in a public form if you expect anyone to take you seriously.

So either put up or shut up.

Climate scientists get paid a pittance by comparison to oil compnay PR and spin doctors let alone thier CEO's. They don't get a penny of the fabled 'grant money' themselves - that goes towards buying sattelites and radio sondes etc.

Even I make three times what a climate scientist makes and I don't have to cope with death threats from people who are so terrified of the coming change they would rather kill someone than face up to reality.

Re: So which is it?

"...It is not warming which melts Himalayan glaciers, it is particulate polution..."

It's long been known that 'soot' is a contributory factor in the varying melt rates of the high altitude Karakorum range glaciers. There is no evidence it is the primary factor either there or in the rest of the world's glaciers.

And, of course, the majority of the Himalyan glaciers ARE in rapid retreat - only the high altitude glaciers are building up as a result of the increased precipitation. The lower ones are melting before our eyes. You don't have to be a climate scientist to see this - you just have to go there and take a look for yourself.

Re: So which is it?

Hi Ralph

It's just a minor anomoly. Don't take my word for it. Simply go and have a look for yourself at any of the other 99% of glaciers around the world.

Interesting that some factions will make a huge fuss about a tiny area anomalous area and yet completely ignore what is happenning everywhere else.

Stand by for; "The Arctic has recovered!" and suchlike. Heh heh.