The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Scepticism and science on climate change > Comments

Scepticism and science on climate change : Comments

By John Burnheim, published 21/11/2013

In any area of science it occasionally happens that some very eminent scientist adopts a position that is contrary to the consensus in a matter that is closely connected with their great achievements.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
I get banned for calling you an idiot Poirot, so I won't.
Posted by cohenite, Saturday, 23 November 2013 3:17:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LEGO wrote: “The climate scientists predicted on Thursday that Sydney would be fine and sunny on Saturday. I just looked out my window and it is pouring with rain.”

Did they?

Who are these climate scientists and why are they wasting their time predicting weather when we have meteorologists for that?

And why is it that “sceptics” so often cannot tell the difference between weather and climate?

‘But it was cold somewhere in the world yesterday!’ - “Sceptic”

To top things off, however, JF Aus pipes up with a sarcastic, look-at-me-I’m-pretending-to-be-someone-who-accepts-the-science-on-climate-change comment; further demonstrating the confusion amongst “sceptics” as to what requires evidence and that which we can (or cannot) take at face value without resorting to the argument from incredulity fallacy.

You guys really are a bright bunch, aren’t you.
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 23 November 2013 9:18:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A J Phillips,

You should be able to answer whether AGW - Kyoto - IPCC science has measured and assessed photosynthesis-linked warmth in ocean algae plant matter proliferated by unprecedented land use and sewage nutrient pollution.

Can you answer that Mr/Ms Phillips?

Gas from plant matter in animal cud is measured in AGW science but what about AGW links to ocean algae, especially where ice is reported melting more than usual?

Is warmth in algae measured or not, or what scientific grounds exist to not measure it?

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/june/arctic-algal-blooms-060712.html
Posted by JF Aus, Saturday, 23 November 2013 9:50:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gee, JF Aus, that's a good question!

But because I'm sure you're not one to throw out a red herring with some unrelated, out-of-the-blue question in rebuttal, I'll give you the chance to explain how you think yourself and LEGO are entitled to any sort of credibility after your apparent confusing of meteorology with climate science, and naivety of the "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" point before I answer it.

After all, if I'm to take your concerns seriously, I'm going to want to know that I'm dealing with someone who knows what they're talking about, and doesn't just randomly grab an argument that they've read on WUWT and thinks sounds good, as a rebuttal. Because, as I'm sure you understand, answering a question with something that one believes is an unknown, is fallacious.

That's what creationists do.
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 23 November 2013 10:48:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Phillips,

How can you be sure about a red herring if you have no relevant scientific evidence?

I think I am entitled to connect study of meteors with climate because influence on change in climate is dominated by oceans including biology of ocean ecosystems, and marine biology is not (yet) included in meteorological or climate science.

My background might enlighten you.
Since the early 1960’s I have been working with chemicals underwater in the ocean but in recent years reaction in those chemicals has changed because of solar energy being increasingly reduced slightly, apparently due increased green vegetable matter also decreasing visibility. Now at this moment you may be thinking of a real nut case.

Briefly and in other words, think of light penetration in water and a background in underwater ocean filmmaking. That experience led to stumbling on malnutrition amongst seafood protein dependent Pacific islanders. And long term independent general research and observations of substance since 1982 has focused on possible causes and solutions.
Increased green matter in ocean water does not just affect film exposure.

First hand observation indicates epiphyte algae matter reducing photosynthesis in estuary and bay and lagoon seagrass that forms nurseries supplying food web dependent fish and animals.
Fish are not immune to starvation, neither are seafood dependent islanders.
Living things require adequate food in order to survive and to multiply, the latter including fish.
The problem is not overfishing, as media claims without scientific evidence.
The problem is food web collapse primarily due to algae due to nutrient pollution, due to sewage nutrient loadings dumped daily in food web ecosystem currents.
The nutrients are bonded to the fresh water that tends toward the surface and wind blown currents.

Experience indicates solutions are not occurring due media suppression of debate while editorial focus is often on non-sense.

Algal blooms are increasing in number and mass, including ocean dead zones where land use and sewage nutrient proliferated algae increases is even leading to anoxia.

Continued…………
Posted by JF Aus, Sunday, 24 November 2013 9:23:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cont’d……….

There is now so much algae also in rivers, bays, lagoons and whole open ocean nearer to heavily populated regions such as northern hemisphere waters.

Basic science explains increased matter and heat transfer particle to particle. So, take a beaker of water with pea soup added and an equal beaker of pure water, boil both equally, allow to cool, measure which retains warmth for a longer period.

I have a slight advantage here. For my first job after leaving school I was given an old army jeep, a half round straw broom and a spanner.
The job was loosening ends of stock water troughs on a 240,000 acre outback Australian sheep and cattle station, to sweep out sand and algae.
After 3 months I was over it. I had gone bush due excitement of handling horses, so I asked the station manager why the trough cleaning. Reply was this.
When stock arrive late afternoon they want cool water, if water is warm some stock hang by the dusty watering place till maybe midnight, some stay till morning before returning to where feed can be found, while loitering dust gets in the wool, reducing value of that wool.

Somewhere pre Internet there has surely been a study on warmth retaining characteristics of algae. Or did farmers just put a finger in the water and find out?
So therein is that food-web-aside, but serious question again.

Has AGW – Kyoto – IPCC - climate science, measured and assessed photosynthesis-linked warmth in ocean macro and micro algae plant matter proliferated by land use and sewage nutrient pollution?

Please answer that question. For a number or reasons there is dire urgent need to attend to the algae problem.

(I cannot speak for LEGO except to say that incomplete science focused on emissions is pitting many good people against each other in debate influenced by trading scheme spin pumped out by once respected and trusted major media
Posted by JF Aus, Sunday, 24 November 2013 9:24:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy