Why I must speak out about climate change

[Alastair]

I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
heard.

http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-climate-change/

Cheers, Alastair.

[hector e]

we just got rid of the 2 pussies on here dullish and larry, hopefully
for good.
do have a deathwish for u.s.w?

[Dave Cornwell]

hector e wrote:
> we just got rid of the 2 pussies on here dullish and larry, hopefully
> for good.
> do have a deathwish for u.s.w?
>

-----------------------------
There is another I would have preferred to have lost.
Dave

[Weatherlawyer]

On Mar 13, 10:45 pm, hector e <8...@12213.com> snipped
Received: by 10.68.227.166 with SMTP id sb6mr561537pbc.
4.1331678732034;
Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: h9ni22922pbe.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!
goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.ett.com.ua!not-for-mail
From: hector e <8...@12213.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:45:27 +0000
Organization: ETT newsserver
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <jjoim9$24kn$1...@news.ett.com.ua>
References: <43f2409e-1e78-404d-ae6a-
ac5ecd...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5adcf369.bb.sky.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: use...@news.ett.com.ua
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.6.1
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216
Thunderbird/10.0.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Did you think that top posting would be a good disguise?

The days of sunny high pressures have gone.uk.sci.weather - 6 posts
- 4 authors - Last post: 2 hours ago
hector e 8...@12213.com uk sci weather On 13/03/2012 9:12 AM,
853d31d2fd9

Suggestion please for accessing 'uk.sci.weather'...uk.sci.weather -
19 posts
hector e 8...@12213.com uk sci weather

And that's it.

Come on.

[Col]

"Alastair" <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...

The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
change!
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

[Paul Hyett]

On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 at 05:55:05, Col <reddw...@btinternet.com> wrote
in uk.sci.weather :

And yet there's *still* no definitive proof that it's anything more than
a natural change...
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

[Adam Lea]

No there isn't any "proof" but that is because there is no "proof" in
science, proof is a mathematical concept. There is, however.
overwhelming evidence that human activities are contributing to climate
change especially from the period 1970 onwards.

[Alastair]

On Mar 14, 5:55 am, "Col" <reddwar...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Alastair" <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>
> >I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
> > important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
> > out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
> > heard.
>

> >http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-clima...

>
> The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
> change!
> --
> Col
>
> Bolton, Lancashire
> 160m asl

Yes, but very few are willing to face up to the fact that the results
will be catastrophic.

I just thought I ought to be brave enough to post that here. At least
I will be able to face my grandchildren with a clear conscience.

Cheers, Alastair.

[John Hall]

In article <Bdednb9x1qAhr_3S...@bt.com>,

My thought too. Presumably they aren't apocalyptic enough for Alastair.
--
John Hall
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw

[Martin Brown]

On 14/03/2012 08:22, Paul Hyett wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 at 05:55:05, Col <reddw...@btinternet.com> wrote
> in uk.sci.weather :
>
>> "Alastair" <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>>> I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
>>> important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
>>> out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
>>> heard.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-climate
>>> -change/
>>
>> The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
>> change!

Though I am inclined to think that Hansen overplays his hand somewhat.

> And yet there's *still* no definitive proof that it's anything more than
> a natural change...

There never is *definitive* proof in science. The best that you can ever
hope for it that the theory is consistent with *ALL* the observed facts
and has not so far been experimentally refuted by observations.

The scientific method continually refines its description of the
universe in the light of new observations as they become available.

Proof is strictly reserved for the domain of mathematics.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Buchan Meteo]

Hils scrive:

> On 2012-03-14 08:47, Alastair wrote:
>> On Mar 14, 5:55 am, "Col"<reddwar...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of
>>> climate change!
>>> --
>>> Col

>> Yes, but very few are willing to face up to the fact that the results
>> will be catastrophic.
>

> http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/james-lovelock-the-
earth-is-about-to-catch-a-morbid-fever-that-may-last-as-long-as-100000-
years-523161.html

James Lovelock should be shamed of himself.

--
Gianna
Peterhead, Scotland

buchan-meteo.org.uk

[Martin Brown]

He is looking to sell more books that way by being controversial.
After all any publicity is good publicity.

And he could just be right - the world shows no signs of moving towards
a low carbon economy in the forseeable future so a lot more climate
change will be locked in before we get any respite from rising CO2.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Weatherlawyer]

On Mar 14, 8:22 am, Paul Hyett <vidcap...@invalid83261.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 at 05:55:05, Col <reddwar...@btinternet.com> wrote

> in uk.sci.weather :
>
>
>
> >"Alastair" <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
> >>I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
> >> important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
> >> out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
> >> heard.
>
> >>http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-climate
> >>-change/
>
> >The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
> >change!
>
> And yet there's *still* no definitive proof that it's anything more than
> a natural change...

Adam and Martin are referring to Geo-Physics and perhaps evolution
when they say there is no proof in "science".

Science of course demands proof. And controlled experiment is the
Scientific Method".

Like evolution, glowballs is not a science.
It is a philosophy. As such its beliefs are those of religion more
than science.
Anyone of any religion can believe in scientific facts.

Belief in scientific fancies are more limited.

It would be nice to get the text from that speech as it contains quite
a few unjustified quantum leaps, not of faith but of facts.

He relates the radiation from Venus to its atmospheric content without
for example discussing the nearness of Venus to the sun and the effect
of soalr radiation on the upper atmosphere.

Another one was the snippet about buoys measuring ocean temperatures.
It's fairly obvious from the global temperature charts of oceans that
these are related to over-fishing not carbon dioxide.

Yet he uses the melt of glaciers and etc., to emphasise this heat
build up without explaining how the enormous latent heat absorbtion of
the melting ice has not managed to keep temperatures down.

Or is the tiny increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide likely to have
has an as yet unreprorted immense effect?

The increased carbon dioxide is supposed to raise sea levels without
increasing cloud levels and in fact atmosphere water content all
round.

Is it?

In which case, how is the earth going to stop getting colder whilst it
is heating due to the carbon dioxide?

Water in the sky carries heat to the outer limits.
And
Water in the sky reflects sunlight away from the earth.

I am not a climate change denier.
I am not a glowballs denier.

I am just wondering what some people are actually saying.
And why.

[Weatherlawyer]

On Mar 14, 11:05 am, Hils <h...@saynotospam.net> wrote:
> On 2012-03-14 08:47, Alastair wrote:
>

> > On Mar 14, 5:55 am, "Col"<reddwar...@btinternet.com>  wrote:

> >> The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of climate
> >> change!
> >> --
> >> Col

> > Yes, but very few are willing to face up to the fact that the results
> > will be catastrophic.
>

> http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/james-lovelock-the-...

Not working for me, Lawrence:
Sorry but we haven't been able to serve the page you requested -
please try again

If you typed in a URL, please make sure you have typed it correctly.

In particular, make sure that the URL you typed is all in lower
case.

If you think this article may be missing, please contact
new...@independent.co.uk stating the URL of this page.

If you require further assistance, please contact our user help staff
at the following address:

user...@independent.co.uk

[Col]

Alastair Cwrote:

> On Mar 14, 5:55 am, "Col" <reddwar...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> "Alastair" <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>>
>> news:43f2409e-1e78-404d...@l14g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
>>> important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to
>>> speak out about the dangers that we face from climate change,
>>> should be heard.
>>
>>> http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-clima...
>>
>> The vast majority of scientists are warning about the dangers of
>> climate change!
>> --
>> Col
>>
>> Bolton, Lancashire
>> 160m asl
>
> Yes, but very few are willing to face up to the fact that the results
> will be catastrophic.

He is towards the extreme end of the GW spectrum. A complete
doomsayer. Even within more mainstream views there is no real
consensus as to the expected temperature rise by the end of the
century. Anything between 2-5°C I believe. That's quite a spread!

> I just thought I ought to be brave enough to post that here. At least
> I will be able to face my grandchildren with a clear conscience.

You must feel so much better now, getting that off your chest.

[hector e]

is that another moan?

[hector e]

youre clever, tremor boy

im quaking in my boots

u r 2 l33t for me

[Col]

hector e wrote:
> is that another moan?

Is that another name change?

Go away Tibbs, you worthless individual.

[Sleepalot]

Hansen is making a fortune from his alarmism.
<http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/18/dr-james-hansens-growing-financial-scandal-now-over-a-million-dollars-of-outside-income/>

and considering his age, he's got nothing to lose
<http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/12/quote-of-the-week-dr-james-hansen-of-nasa-giss-unhinged/>

He's falsifying data;
in Australia
<http://www.real-science.com/hansen-tampering-down-under-too>
in Iceland
<http://www.real-science.com/another-smoking-gun-that-hansen-is-a-climate-crook>
in the US
<http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355>
and so on.

[Alastair]

On Mar 21, 6:47 pm, Sleepalot <sleepalo...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Alastair <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
> >important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
> >out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
> >heard.
>

> >http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-clima...

>
> >Cheers, Alastair.
>
> Hansen is making a fortune from his alarmism.

> <http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/18/dr-james-hansens-growing-financ...>

This is a .sci group and we only discuss the science of climate
change. Whether Hansen is fiddling his tax returns or not is
irrelevant to the science.

Keep to the science. Will the Arctic sea ice disappear this summer?

Cheers, Alastair,

[James Brown]

In message
<545cc312-87e1-408f...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Alastair <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> writes

I am fairly confident the route to the north pole will be open, but tend
to think there will be a remnant towards NE Russia.

James
--
James Brown

[Sleepalot]

Wow. So many lies in so few words.

My favourite bit was where you cut out the links showing Hansen falsifying
temperature data, ...

-------------------------------------------

He's falsifying data;
in Australia
<http://www.real-science.com/hansen-tampering-down-under-too>
in Iceland
<http://www.real-science.com/another-smoking-gun-that-hansen-is-a-climate-crook>
in the US
<http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355>
and so on.

--------------------------------------------

... and said "Keep to the science".


I wonder why you did that: who were you hoping to fool?

[Graham P Davis]

On 23/03/12 21:21, James Brown wrote:
> In message
> <545cc312-87e1-408f...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
> Alastair <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>

>> Keep to the science. Will the Arctic sea ice disappear this summer?
>>
>> Cheers, Alastair,
>
> I am fairly confident the route to the north pole will be open, but tend
> to think there will be a remnant towards NE Russia.
>

Alastair, I don't think wind conditions have been favourable lately for
removal of much old ice from the Arctic so I think this summer will not
see a record low though, again, it will be close. However, I still stick
to my forecast of more than half-a-dozen years ago that the Arctic will
become ice-free this decade.

James, I'm not sure why you think there'd be some ice remaining near NE
Russia. The most persistent area of ice should be that near the Canadian
Archipelago and North Greenland where, every year, the majority of
multi-year ice is to be found.

--
Graham Davis, Bracknell, Berks. E-mail: change boy to man
LibreOffice: http://www.documentfoundation.org/
openSUSE Linux: http://www.opensuse.org/en/

[Weatherlawyer]

On Mar 24, 7:16 am, Graham P Davis <news...@scarlet-jade.com> wrote:
> On 23/03/12 21:21, James Brown wrote:
>
> > In message

> > <545cc312-87e1-408f-b1a3-b59b2c4df...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,

> > Alastair <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
> >> Keep to the science. Will the Arctic sea ice disappear this summer?
>

> > I am fairly confident the route to the north pole will be open, but tend
> > to think there will be a remnant towards NE Russia.
>
> Alastair, I don't think wind conditions have been favourable lately for
> removal of much old ice from the Arctic so I think this summer will not
> see a record low though, again, it will be close. However, I still stick
> to my forecast of more than half-a-dozen years ago that the Arctic will
> become ice-free this decade.
>
> James, I'm not sure why you think there'd be some ice remaining near NE
> Russia. The most persistent area of ice should be that near the Canadian
> Archipelago and North Greenland where, every year, the majority of
> multi-year ice is to be found.

I rather think that the eradication of the Aral Sea has played a part
in all this. Presumably it lead to the over-supply of fresh water in
the Arctic from melting glaciers.

When this happened with the Nile and Lake Chad in the 60's, there were
decades of drought in Africa.

A layer of slick water on top of the Arctic Ocean makes the
overturning that normally takes place impossible. The water is called
"dead" due to the difficulty of navigation (presumably for motor
powered vessels though the Fram was caught in some.)

It aught have the same effect on water welling up from depth, more so
if the upwelling is both colder and saltier than the sub-surface
brine.

At least it would explain satellite data of high Arctic temperatures.

(Obviously Polar Ice is ALWAYS drifting in a "dead pool" as it
provides its own fresh water.)It will drift wherever the winds take
it, whatever the temperature.

[James Brown]

In message <9t5amo...@mid.individual.net>, Graham P Davis
<new...@scarlet-jade.com> writes

>On 23/03/12 21:21, James Brown wrote:
>> In message
>> <545cc312-87e1-408f...@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
>> Alastair <a...@abmcdonald.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>> Keep to the science. Will the Arctic sea ice disappear this summer?
>>>
>>> Cheers, Alastair,
>>
>> I am fairly confident the route to the north pole will be open, but tend
>> to think there will be a remnant towards NE Russia.
>>
>
>
>Alastair, I don't think wind conditions have been favourable lately for
>removal of much old ice from the Arctic so I think this summer will not
>see a record low though, again, it will be close. However, I still
>stick to my forecast of more than half-a-dozen years ago that the
>Arctic will become ice-free this decade.
>
>James, I'm not sure why you think there'd be some ice remaining near NE
>Russia. The most persistent area of ice should be that near the
>Canadian Archipelago and North Greenland where, every year, the
>majority of multi-year ice is to be found.
>

I would normally agree Graham, but I am becoming increasingly concerned
when I see e.g.

http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/ssmis/arctic_SSMIS_nic.png

It looks as if a lead could open up which might affect the normal
multi-year accumulation which as you say is still to the north of
Greenland and Canada.

Cheers
James

--
James Brown

[rupert....@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 22 March 2012 07:47:07 UTC+13, Sleepalot wrote:

You're the liar, clearly an acolyte of the uber-liar Watts, and a troll to boot. Come over to New Zealand's Hot Topic, and try making your "points" there -you'll get dealt to swiftly.

http://hot-topic.co.nz/

[Graham P Davis]

Not sure which area you're referring to, James. The weakish area N of the
Fram Strait may well be fictitious. The picture is also showing an area
of 90-95% concentration within the New Siberian Islands; this is
impossible.

The weakness along the NE coast of Greenland is real and not unusual, as
is the one along the NW coast of Alaska which extends NE into the Arctic.


--
Graham Davis, Bracknell
Whilst it's true that money can't buy you happiness, at least you can
be miserable in comfort.
Newsreader for Windows, Mac, Unix family: http://pan.rebelbase.com/

[Sleepalot]

I make evidence-based claims. You just name-call.
Put up or shut up.

[rupert....@gmail.com]

The "evidence" of the type you cite has been examined and trashed countless times at HT. With so much disinformation rife, that's necessary. Watts has been cuaght out time and time again in cherry-picking, graph-twisting, graph-faking and downright lying. Clearly you're too scared to join the other visiting denialists and face some robust science. Fail.

[Sleepalot]

And yet you are unable to provide a single link to demonstrate that.
QED - You're full of shit.

[Sleepalot]

Sleepalot <sleep...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>rupert....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sunday, 25 March 2012 22:14:21 UTC+13, Sleepalot wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Thursday, 22 March 2012 07:47:07 UTC+13, Sleepalot wrote:
>>> >> Alastair wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >I am not posting this to cause controversy, but because I feel it is
>>> >> >important that practically the only scientist, who is willing to speak
>>> >> >out about the dangers that we face from climate change, should be
>>> >> >heard.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >http://planet3.org/2012/03/11/hansen-why-i-must-speak-out-about-climate-change/
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >> >Cheers, Alastair.
>>> >>
>>> >> Hansen is making a fortune from his alarmism.
>>> >> <http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/18/dr-james-hansens-growing-financial-scandal-now-over-a-million-dollars-of-outside-income/>
>>> >>
>>> >> and considering his age, he's got nothing to lose
>>> >> <http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/12/quote-of-the-week-dr-james-hansen-of-nasa-giss-unhinged/>
>>> >>
>>> >> He's falsifying data;
>>> >> in Australia

(Alice Springs)

>>> >> <http://www.real-science.com/hansen-tampering-down-under-too>
>>> >> in Iceland
>>> >> <http://www.real-science.com/another-smoking-gun-that-hansen-is-a-climate-crook>
>>> >> in the US
>>> >> <http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/1998changesannotated.gif?w=500&h=355>
>>> >> and so on.
>>> >
>>> >You're the liar, clearly an acolyte of the uber-liar Watts, and a troll to boot. Come over to New Zealand's Hot Topic, and try making your "points" there -you'll get dealt to swiftly.
>>> >
>>> >http://hot-topic.co.nz/
>>>
>>> I make evidence-based claims. You just name-call.
>>> Put up or shut up.
>>
>>The "evidence" of the type you cite has been examined and trashed countless times at HT.
>
>And yet you are unable to provide a single link to demonstrate that.
>QED - You're full of shit.

Here's Hansen commiting fraud in Australia again.
(Brisbane/Eagle Farm)
<http://www.real-science.com/competition-to-be-the-biggest-climate-crook>

and here's Hansen commiting fraud in Bolivia
(La Paz/Alto)
<http://www.real-science.com/hansen-cooling-bolivias-past-by-5c-per-century>

By the way, all you weather guys, your silence convicts you, too.
Where's your outrage at this fraud?

[rupert....@gmail.com]

You are similar to the moron Richard Treadgold in this country - although at least he uses his name when he posts - a shill for the "Climate (non)Science Coalition", a collection of climatological ignoramuses which is trying to mount a court case against NZ climate scientists for supposedly distorting the country's temperature record. Their "case" is a load of incompetent, unscientific twaddle with elementary howlers a prominent feature. If you want to learn about that, or see plenty of refutations of statements by the liar Watts, do some reading at HT - you won't of course, because you a simply a troll and "useful idiot" for the Watts cause - typically hiding of course under anonymity. Go back to sleep - humanity will be better served when you're not busy spreading lies.

[Sleepalot]

That's three goes you've had: three bouts of name-calling: three failures to
provide anything to support your claims. Three strikes. You're out.