Is Mr Fry, occasional Vanuatuan, at this months climate clownfest in Cancun, Mexico?

I wonder who pays his way, probably an Ausaid flowdown .. it's sure to be the Australian taxpayer however he does it, what a scam.

Clownfish, love your work .

And the fossil fuel addict said...

The real world has moved on from the AGW alarmism. Coal is King.
Posted by Leo Lane, Sunday, 28 November 2010 4:02:45 PM

In your dreams Leo:)

BLUE

Ken Fabos could not find anything relevant so linked us to the work of the previously reputable, but now politicised work of the CSIRO, giving us some pointless material on sea levels.

We know that sea levels are a complicated area, and they rise and fall in different parts of the world for many different reasons, so a graph showing a trend has little relevance, here, and Ken has certainly failed to show any relevance to Cliff’s article or to Tuvalu.

There has been no rise in sea levels at Tuvalu.

Here is a sample of the message from John Church, one of the group at CSIRO who produce the material referred to us by Ken Fabos:

“If society is to reduce the risk of major ice-sheet contributions to sea-level rise and of profound changes in marine ecosystems, a sustained reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is an urgent priority”

Would you trust a graph from a scientist who makes such a statement, in the face of the fact that there is no scientific basis for asserting any measurable contribution to global warming from anthropogenic emissions?

He said these words recently, at a time when there has been no global warming for 12 years, and no warming in the Southern hemisphere, where most of the ice is situated, for at least 30 years. The total warming of the globe up to 1998 was seven tenths of a degree, virtually nothing.

It is difficult to ignore the sheer dishonesty of the alarmists.

Deep Blue, you do not seem to have noticed that Spain, the great pusher of wind farms and solar (claytons) power, has deservedly gone broke, in following the unreality promoted by the alarmists. In the real world DB, power at a feasible price for industry, is obtained from that great old standby, fossil fuel.

Ken

You suggest: "When a few keystrokes and mouseclicks can take you to global data on sea level like this one http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_last_15.html that includes maps showing a strong and consistent trend of global average sea level rise as well as showing that sea levels aren't rising the same everywhere."

I checked out this site. Sorry. Leaving aside other important considerations, less than two decades of data is surely insufficient to draw (alarmist) conclusions? Secondly, is comparing this limited data with the (presumably less than high quality) "average value over the 20th century" meaningful? Thirdly, even the CSIRO admits uncertainty about "whether or not this represents a further increase in the rate of sea level rise."

Historical sea level changes - Last two decades
High quality measurements of (near)-global sea level have been made since late 1992 by satellite altimeters, in particular, TOPEX/Poseidon (launched August, 1992), Jason-1 (launched December, 2001) and Jason-2 (launched June, 2008). This data has shown a more-or-less steady increase in Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) of around 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/year over that period. This is more than 50% larger than the average value over the 20th century. Whether or not this represent a further increase in the rate of sea level rise is not yet certain."

An earlier post by you elsewhere [4 January 2009 at 7:17 AM] was a surprise too. You wrote that it would be better if the "suitably qualified" commented on subjects like this one, as they "would (should) get taken more seriously than someone like myself who has no relevant qualifications and holds no relevant position".

Alice (in Warmerland)

Leo Lane

You keep saying the warming has not increased you are totally wrong and just cherry picking, the last 12 months hottest on record and this year could be the hottest, and it is a La Nina period and low solar activity.

Typical of denialists they twist the facts.

Just try reading http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-cooling.htm

Alice, surely you could have seen and clicked on the sidebar links to longer term data. I don't see why I should have to do the few keystrokes and mouseclicks for people who prefer their groundless disbelief to knowledge.

Alice and Leo, you would clearly like to dismiss outright CSIRO representations of data from a variety of highly credible sources such as satellite telemetry (Topex/Poseidon, Jason1 and Jason2) historical tide gauge data ( which the satellites are consistent with for the period of overlap), and highly reputable institutions such as the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. Instead you clearly favour misleading information about one specific place by someone who conveniently has failed to mention that coral reefs - that contribute to stability as well as elevation of coral atolls - are highly at risk from Warming as well as Ocean Acidification.

And, of course, he fails to mention the basis of reliable expectation of more sea level rise. Or mention the rest of the world's low lying regions, most of which are not conveniently showing elevation rise in excess of sea level rise.

Typically, authors like Cliff Ollier want to distract attention away from the huge and overwhelming body of evidence of global warming. Hottest decade on record, after the second hottest decade on record after the third hottest decade on record from multiple independent global temperature estimates - ice sheet loss, glacial loss, ocean heat content rise, borehole temperature rise ,phenological changes - every indicator that we have, ground, ocean and space, all independently showing clear evidence of a warming world.

Without the greenhouse effect and human emissions, every attempt at explanation of current climate change falls to pieces on close examination. Yet I notice only unquestioning support for whatever rubbish the high priests of climate change denial say from the loyal disbelievers - the faithful brethren accepting it all without expressions of doubt. And you expect to be taken seriously! What a joke. Give me real scientists practicing true scientific scepticism over your quasi-religious dogmatism any day.