OT - One for TNP?

[David WE Roberts]

Met Office allegedly 'burried' a press release on the lack of global warming over Christmas.

[Brian Gaff]

I think they will all come to regret the term global warming. It is of course happening, but climate change is actually more accurate for those who want to describe the effect seen at any point on the earth. The fact is still true, though the amount we are a factor in it is and probably always will be debatable, and whether we can or would want to mitigate it by trying to control the storage of carbon in non natural ways. If you look through the records by drilling down, you find that our planet has gone through many changes in climate. It has obviously been much colder as in ice ages, and much warmer as well. the mere proliferation of life as plants put more oxygen in then fires burned and put more carbon in etc etc. animals give out methane just as a natural part of their metabolism after all.

We are not helping of course, but I suspect, being realistic about it, people have short lives when plotted against the times of cold and warming cycles on the earth, so is it any wonder that we plan short term?

Brian

[Java Jive]

The keyword is 'allegedly' ...

Quote 1

"However MP Graham Stringer said the Met Office should have been more upfront.

"By putting out the information on Christmas Eve they were just burying bad news ? that they have got their climate change forecast wrong," said Stringer."

Quote 2

"It's the agency executives' desire to feed the news media with alarmist and politically-motivated "stories" that's the problem"

There is clearly a contradiction there.

Excavation through the layers of public comment and media hype reveals that the simple truth is, like every organisation involved in such forecasting, from time to time the Met Office changes, hopefully improves, its computer models, and consequently different predictions are given. This forecast revision is nothing more than that. It doesn't mean that CC has stalled, or gone into reverse. It means simply that the Met has revised its computer model.

However, they are still 80% of the previous predicti> Met Office allegedly 'burried' a press release on the lack of global warming

[GB]

Can't we think of our children and grandchildren, as well as other people's?

[geoff]

In message , David WE Roberts writes

mind you "Lack of global warming over xmas" - had they gone off on holiday ...?

[newshound]

We do. But, we think a bit less about great grandchildren and so on. Effectively, just like investors, we have a discount rate although unlike investors we don't normally think about it explicitly. With a low enough discount rate, we should be living in a tent and saving 90% of our income for our descendants. But, most of us don't do that. The very wealthy and great landowners do make provision via trusts. Most of us just buy a house and leave it to our children or grandchildren.

One of the reasons Stearn was able to conclude it was worth investing against global warming was he used what other economists regarded as a ridiculously low discount rate, so was able to claim benefits far into the future.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I can think of em, but they don't exist.

But that really is what global warming is all about: thinking of things that don't exist.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Have you read the swingeing rebuttal of Stearn?

Its magnificent - about as good as watching Dibnah demolish a cooling tower.

[Terry Fields]

No there isn't.

Quote 1 referred to a particular announcement that took place on a particular day

Quote 2 refers to a general policy.

I have commented before on your tendency to conflate the particular with the general, and you have just done so again.

The Met Office has been a supporter of GW. Ask yourself whey they chose to announce a major revision of one of its GW forecasts at a time when people had their minds elsewhere. What other major announcements, by any organisation, took place on Christmas Eve?

That is was a revision *downwards*, and thus not in agreement with their alarmist ethos, might have something to do with it. I am confident that in the next two years there will be another downwards revision.

What a pity it is that some of their previous publications on the topic now are no longer available, despite the essentially zero cost of storage and retrieval of digital documents.

[The Natural Philosopher]

are no longer available, despite the

Which is why I always keep copies of interesting documents on my server.

After a link to an incriminating bit of climate alarmism 'disappeared'

[Tim Streater]

Winston Smith obviously works there.

[Terry Fields]

I'm fairly sure this was the GW brochure I had in mind:

it's 'not available on this server' - or any other server, apparently.

[Terry Fields]

LOL

[The Natural Philosopher]

Indeed. vanished without trace..

[Brian Gaff]

Well we can, but history seems not to suggest we do.

Brian

[Andy Burns]

[Man at B&Q]

If the models have improved then the models upon which current policy is predicated were inferior, just as many have been saying but were accused of being climate deniers.

About time, too.

Which itself was based on an onferior model and is thus called into question.

Nor that it is "continuing". I don't think there is any validity for many of the claims made about climate change.

MBQ

[Java Jive]

Therefore Quote 1 is at very least an exception that calls into question Quote 2.

general, and you have just done

No, there is an inherent contradiction.

announce a major revision of one

other major announcements, by

alarmist ethos, might have something

downwards revision.

It may be that there is something in the supposed reason for them releasing something on Christmas Eve, but equally it may be entirely coincidence. For example, last Christmas Eve was a Monday, have you bothered to check what days of the week other documents of a similar nature have been released? This year, AFAICS, the DVLA was closed over most of the entire Christmas holiday season; perhaps the Met Office was as well, and therefore, if there were last minute updates, that was the last day they could release it?

I don't know why the document was released on Christmas Eve, but I note that you ASSUME there was a hidden agenda, when in fact it may have been entirely a case of coincidence. Such an assumption is entirely unscientific.

are no longer available, despite the

I agree with that, but if, as your claims imply, you have access to a university library, you should be in a good position to do something about it, and certainly have no excuse for providing so few links in support of your claims.

There is nothing essentially sinister in this, it is by no means uncommon. It can be very difficult even to download drivers for PC equipment that is over five years old. When researching my family history a few years back, I spent hours finding the London Gazette's references to promotions, citations for the awards of medals, etc, and within a month they changed the entire system, and broke all the links

- I've never had the heart to do all the work again.

I note that at every turn you assume that the Met has a hidden agenda. It is certainly clear to me, and therefore I suspect to other independent minded people reading this thread, that you have a your own agenda based on your own climate sceptic beliefs, and are therefore not looking at relevant facts dispassionately.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I don't think there is any validity for any of the claims made about climate change.

[The Natural Philosopher]

>>>>>>>> ...but it's 'not available on this server' - or any other server, >>> apparently. >>