I believe that global warming is happening and that it is almost certainly man made. But there are definitely things that bother me about the data. This rapid temperature change is one. Another one is that there is some issue with the sea temperature measurements not matching between the 1930s and the 1940s. And the explanation seems to be that they changed the sort of buckets they used (I can't remember exactly). So, I do sometimes have concerns that whenever some of the data doesn't fit the theory, there is always a "reason".
-
Looking for a smarter way to manage your heating this winter? We’ve been testing the new Aqara Radiator Thermostat W600 to see how quiet, accurate and easy it is to use around the home. Click here read our review.
Climate Change
- Thread starter Highway Man
- Start date
I believe that global warming is happening and that it is almost certainly man made. But there are definitely things that bother me about the data. This rapid temperature change is one. Another one is that there is some issue with the sea temperature measurements not matching between the 1930s and the 1940s. And the explanation seems to be that they changed the sort of buckets they used (I can't remember exactly). So, I do sometimes have concerns that whenever some of the data doesn't fit the theory, there is always a "reason".
Tread lightly - notch will be along to call you a climate denier/trump /maga/farage/ supporter. - Oh and a coward - dont forget that one.
I bet you are a flat farther too. Your intelct certainly fits the bill.
Yeah sorry I meant to say from around 2017 engines started to become bad.Little earlier than that for me. 2017 is getting late. Few years on from then and car makers seem to be producing some real lemons. Not helped by the OTT emission controls fitted to them. I'm sticking to earlier stuff. KISS - Keep It Simple, Sweetheart.
When they started the Euro 6 stuff.
They started putting the cam belt in the engine with the oil and now engines have the "wet belt" design which is bad. Wet belts need changing at 60k miles and it requires a major strip down, costing around £2000
Ah thanks for reminding me I need to add that one to the notch list for MNW67
Oh and its spelt intellect - you imbecile ( I think it goes )
Typing on my phone. I'm surprised it's legible.Ah thanks for reminding me I need to add that one to the notch list for MNW67
Oh and its spelt intellect - you imbecile ( I think it goes )
Big fingers small keys.
Nope - imbecile I would of thought you would know better seeing as you are quick to point other posters mistakes.
And what is a flat farther
You only spelt 14 words and managed to get 2 of them wrongYes you did.
Tice and GBnews are both funded by fossil fuels
And in return they both push climate change misinformation and myths
And Aveatry laps it up
It does not prove what you claim.
You need to read more on the subject, as you don’t know enough to realise you are wrong
Ice core study can’t show temperature
scientists cannot directly measure temperatures from ice cores, they have to rely on measuring the oxygen isotope – 18O – which is correlated with temperature, but imperfectly so.
A temperature reconstruction using the Greenland Ice Sheet Project 2 (“GISP2”) ice core was first published by Prof Kurt Cuffey and Dr Gary Clow in a 1997 paper published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. Prof Richard Alley of Penn State University also used the record in a 2000 paper. Neither of these papers provided a comparison of GISP2 record with current conditions, as the uncertainties in the ice core proxy reconstruction were too large and the proxy record only extended back to 1855.
The GISP2 ice core record was used in a number of papers in the late 1990s and 2000s that examined changes over the last ice age and the start of the current warm era – the Holocene – around 11,000 years ago. Around 2009, it caught the attention of Dr J Storrs Hall of the Foresight Institute, a technology-focused nonprofit group, who wrote a blog postsuggesting that it disproved the idea that “human-emitted CO2 is the only thing that could account for the recent warming trend”.
That post was republished on a climate sceptic blog called Watts Up With That, which followed up with its own version of a GISP2 graph in late 2010 by Dr Don Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at the Western Washington University. Easterbrook’s graph, shown below, was shared widely across the internet by climate sceptics and is still frequently seen – with many small variations – to this day in discussions on Twitter, blogs and news article comment threads.
The temperature variation is believed to be caused by transport of heat in the ocean, it’s regional and doesn’t prove global temp change.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 22,980
- Reaction score
- 3,068
- Country
You mentioned that it's a scam and climate scientists are being paid by the government to lie.
Why are they doing it?
'of' instead of 'have' is not a spelling error.Nope - imbecile I would of thought you would know better seeing as you are quick to point other posters mistakes.
And what is a flat farther
It's when chavvy morons have been poorly educated.
Some folk blame the parents. I'm not so sure.
I'd say they just don't know any better.
I make no excuses about my inability to type on my phone and have mentioned it on here previously. I have large hands and big fingers.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 22,980
- Reaction score
- 3,068
- Country
Debates and learning are good as is questioning things if you have an issue. That's the grown up way to go about it.
Starting with, it is all a scam and they are lying to us, so the government can simply raise more tax is for conspiracy fruitcakes.
Nope - I did not say that
