OT: Global temperatures plummeting

[Tim Streater]

I don't mind us fishing them out of the Med but they should then be landed back in Libya.

[TimW]

This is why I am wasting my time. You posted two links.

One to a chart which shows temperatures rising steadily and at an increasing rate since 2000 while saying "I fail to see how anyone can claim the warming has continued in this century, when it clearly hasnt" and that from someone who says "I see you're not very good at interpreting graphs!" Sheesh! somebody needs glasses.

The second to a list of numbers, as if you could read through them and get some kind of understanding. It only confirms my belief that 'looking clever' is a major motive for deniers.

TW

[The Natural Philosopher]

That is correct. The problem is who is actually in denial here?

Those who have taken years to study the arguments, or those who have drunk the kool aid dished out by politicians and the left wing media?

[Jethro_uk]

So what other 17, or even 117 year-spanning graphs can we compare with. If you can produce one from, say 1,000,000 to 999,983 BCE, it would start to back up claims of "warming".

Of course, nobody can. Quite apart from the fact that any changes in markers of climate are subject to noise and jitter, there's no real way of knowing what climate would be doing if mankind did not exist.

[TimW]

So... the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon races, that we deserve what we have because of our moral and cultural superiority just like the lesser peoples deserve their poverty and barbarism, plus a bit of distorted social darwinism and complete with an exhortation not to pity the weak but to be ruthless in our conquests....

This is really orthodox Nazi theory. almost a paraphrase of Mein Kampf, could be straight out of the 1930s so let me be the first to tell you to f*ck off. TW

[The Natural Philosopher]

..is a complete distortion of what he said.

No less was expected when we look at the reasons WHY its distorted....

..because it allows the Denier to deny whilst claiming the moral high ground...

And thus showing HIS 'moral and cultural superiority'!

You couldn't make it up, except he just did...

The real principles of cultural morality are simply these, stuff that works hangs around, until it doesn't work.

A bad idea is one that gets you killed before you have passed on your genes. Such ideas tend to usually, but not always, die. Fir example 'dulce et decorum est pro patria mori' is a really BAD idea for the individual who gets to experience it, but great for the rest of a society that adheres to it.

The culture associated with industrialization, allowed the industrialized Europe to pretty much dictate to the rest of the world, what was going to be what, or else.

The culture was successful and led to rises in western populations unheard of before.

Buy contrast the camel herding moralities of the Islamic hegemony did little or nothing to effect population increases. It was for example only when exposed to western technology medicine and so on that the population boom in this culture happened.

Leaving aside any issues of morality, because I dont do morality, what would happen to western technology and infrastructure if a single dogmatic theological elite gained power and imposed a strict moral code on everyone?

Would that keep the lights on

To idiots of a Left persuasion cultural diversity means driving not only on whichever side of the road your religion dictates, but on the footpaths as well.

Cultural diversity may be morally admirable, but in practice people end up dead.

And of course even the notion that cultural diversity is admirable, is relative to only one sub culture - the Liberal Left.

If you want top hear the modern equivalent of 'Mein Kampf' I suggest you read the Koran. Radical Islam absolutely thinks that cultural diversity is a bad thing, once they have the power. Before that its a useful way to gain power over hearts and minds.

And when it comes to the SS. you need look no further than the rentamobs regularly rousted out by the 'hope not hate' 'animal rights' 'hunt saboteurs' and the like.

Organised violent anti-social acts are the province of the left, and Islam, not the Right, these days.

The so called 'hard right' violent are usually shown to be acting alone, and mentally disturbed anyway.

[damduck-egg]

Don't think the Romans were Anglo Saxon, neither are the Celts,or the Nordic tribes in Scandinavia or those who live in Southern Europe. As I said the constituents have been fairly nasty to each other and others on the way but overall the European attitudes and cultures have been the main drivers to get to where we are now.

If its that evil then why are people elsewhere trying to find a better life in the European geographical area where this moral and cultural superiority started and those places like the North America and Australia to where it spread.

They don't deserve it as an award, but its the way things have turned out.

That is one of those instances where a constituent became nasty to some of the others sol the the others dealt with them. Despicable as they were the world has not seen fit to not use some of the advances that regime made in pursuance of its aims such as good roads ,aviation and using the development of rockets to put man in space and other fields. And though it is distasteful the results of some of the nasty medical experiments have been taken on board as well. So overall the "Western" way carried on advancing despite for a while turning on itself.

Feel free. My whole thoughts and opinions on what is a complicated subject that cannot possibly be discussed to the full on Usenet are as diverse as your oath is simple.

G.Harman

[TimW]

or indeed today

[quote] tobacco, coal, oil, chemicals and biotech companies have poured billions of dollars into an international misinformation machine composed of thinktanks, bloggers and fake citizens? groups. Its purpose is to portray the interests of billionaires as the interests of the common people, to wage war against trade unions and beat down attempts to regulate business and tax the very rich.[/quote]

And still there are clowns like the posters here who think that an academic with a salary and a ticket to a conference is somehow corruption.

[Tim Streater]

TimW has obviously never heard of the Enlightenment, the rule of Law, free speech, etc etc.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Whenever I encounter TimW, Nick or the Pklowepsrion I am reminded of te old T-shirt slogan

"We are the people your parents warned you about" except that today," we are the people WE warned you about" is more appropriate.

Every single failing they claim to see in others, is what they themselves have in spades.

The people most in denial of real climate change are the proponents of AGW.

The largest conspiracy and abuse of corporate and public money, occurs to promote the 'green' agenda.

Anthropogenic Climate change is a convenient lie.

Free speech and the freedom to practice science are regularly attacked by the Green contingent, on the basis that political action wont happen if there is dissent.

The so called idiotic 'precautionary' principle is trotted out to say in the absence of certainty we must not emit carbon dioxide. Logically it could be trotted out to say we must not *stop* emitting carbon dioxide. In the absence of even probabilities, its a meaningless principle altogether.

In the next breath they will assure you that 'the science is settled' because '97% of scientists say it is' despite the fact that what 97% of scientists actually said was entirely different. And there's a petition out there signed by over 3000 saying something completely the opposite.

It seems that people cant tell, or are not bothered by the distinction between fact and propaganda. It makes you realise why people yearn for the days of Stalin and Kruschev, in the old soviet union. AS long as someone tells them 'what the truth is', they are happy to believe it.

[charles]

[Snip]

[Chris Hogg]

I am truly puzzled by your reply. It's as if we're looking at completely different graphs. In case we are, here's the link again.

.

I see pretty much a horizontal line from 2000 to 2014, averaging about

0.65°C above baseline and with a little scatter, and then a gradual upturn and peak at the end as the world heads into El Niño, followed by a fall back to the previous level as we go into La Niña.

Out of interest, does anyone else who's still following this thread see what I've just described, or am I the only one?

It is customary when discussing scientific information to give the source of that information, so that other readers can go and look at it and make up their own minds, reproduce the results, etc. That is why I posted the second link. I think it was Pamela in this group who recently asked for such information to be posted. I'm all in favour of doing it and try so to do as often as I can.

Another reason for giving that second link was to confirm that my source was authoritative, that I hadn't just made up the data, and for you to download them, put them into a spreadsheet as I did, and make your own judgement on whether what I was saying was correct, assuming you could, which I'm seriously beginning to doubt.

It's a list of numbers, because that's what data mostly is, numbers. You weren't expected to derive anything from just looking at the numbers alone. I doubt if anyone could.

[Andy Burns]

Well by sight it does appear to gently slope upwards, of course the eye is drawn to the "pulse" at the end, which might turn out to be another hockey stick, or might droop away to nothing after another year or two.

If any of us were experts at predicting whether graphs were going to go up a bit or down a bit based on the last few readings, I suspect we'd be raking it in from stockmarkets, rather than arguing about whether its getting colder, warmer, warmer faster than before or randomly jiggling about.

[TimW]

Stop for a moment and consider the absurdity of your opinion. Round here people spend their evenings cranking the handle of a photostat machine to stop local fracking by oil companies. They aren't paid and they are often short of money, leadership and strategies. they don't have any obvious motive except concern for the environment as it is threatened by industry. But for you this is propaganda and a paid conspiracy, the work of governments and corporations that you can't name because they don't exist.

On the other side we know because it has been exposed many times that oil and energy companies have budgets which they spend on false think-tanks, fake user groups, paid writers, lobbyists and bloggers to promote false science, to flood the media with misleading reports, deliberately to obscure inconvenient facts and to discredit people who criticise their activities. The motive is clear - big profits. But for you, despite the fact that they are paid these people are just bravely exercising free speech, like dissidents standing up for their beliefs.

You yourself aren't paid of course. You are just an idiot, not even a useful one.

TW

[TimW]

It would be easy enough to turn the list of numbers into a line. I am not doing it though.

TW

[The Natural Philosopher]

Oh purlease.

Doi9nt insult my intelligence. Where are all the 'facts' that they use to support their aurguments made up from?

Who is the 'local organiser' really working for?

I've done local campaigns and as SOON as I had one off the ground the local Tory party worthies waded in and tried to take it over...and make sure it didn't show the government in a bad light.

This is a total bare faced lie. Its been shown time and again that trillions of dollars go to support climate change agendas and the skeptics are by and large totally unfunded.

*You* are the people you warned us about

[Tim Streater]

It's certainly stupid. The environment is *not* threatened by fracking, and its wider use in this country would reduce our gas imports. They are just people who have been hoodwinked by Greenpiss and the like, all of whom have an Agenda.

[Tim Streater]

Perhaps TimW would like to explain to us which aspects of "concern for the environment" cause people to be against fracking.

[Chris Hogg]

Thanks for the confirmation.

[TimW]

That's another issue altogether.