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 > A final thought on 2016 Australian warming > Comments

A final thought on 2016 Australian warming : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 14/3/2017

So any ‘average’ for Australia ignores two different and consistent temperature patterns.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. All
mhaze

You say:
" A NOAA paper. I didn't bother linking to it since we know that you're not interested in reading anything that doesn't support your faith."

At 15 March 2017 9:06:33 PM, I clearly state that alternative truth sites are visited.

Kenneth Richard wrote about the rebounding of Arctic sea ice extent in September of 2016; that does not fit in with 13,556,324 km2(March 18, 2017,)down 51,178 km2 and lowest measured for the date. The long term trend line measured over decades is continuing to go down.

You won't produce a reference, so the assumptions that can be made are you do not have a reference, the reference does not say what you suggest, the reference is quite old, or the reference is misunderstood. I have now provided references from a number of sources, including NASA.

How many factories and internal combustion motors were available before the Industrial Revolution? Does such machinery belch out CO2 and other pollutants?

A tragedy unfolding due to warm temperature of Pacific Ocean as stated in video.

http://youtu.be/iy6LHR4FdCA
Posted by ant, Monday, 20 March 2017 7:58:39 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
ant,

I think the tragedy is running away from discussion and evidence of sewage and land use nutrient pollution destroying coral and mangroves and other biodiversity, yet continuing discussion about CO2.

I will play the game briefly.

You ask, ant, "How many factories and internal combustion motors were available before the Industrial Revolution? Does such machinery belch out CO2 and other pollutants?"

My answer is this.
Before the Industrial Revolution every household, every house and camp, and every outdoor individual, had a fire to cook food EVERY DAY and often another fire to keep warm when needed.

How much CO2 was belched out from all those fires?
Posted by JF Aus, Monday, 20 March 2017 9:02:07 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
ant,

I've simply given up on you. You have a few talking points that you stick to religiously and for which no amount of contrary information or data matters. So I see little point in providing other data which you'll either ignore or offer some spurious reason why you don't want to believe it.

A case in point. Over a year ago now you wrote "Paleoclimatologists indicate that temperatures were not warmer in previous historic times." That is of course arrant rubbish. I started off by showing you Marcott2013 which you started off trying to refute but finally decided to simply ignore eg as above when I point out the higher past temps and the ramifications of that, you just ignore the issue.
When I asked for support for your paleoclimatologists claims you shirted the issue and finally made the lame claim that, since there are lots of papers published each year, some will support your assertions. When I decided to inundate you with lots of papers and datasets refuting your claim you left the discussion.

Only later did you return, using a different nickname, hoping to be not asked to provide evidence (although it is possible you went down this path to avoid havingto admit that you'd been hoodwinked by ICN over the Exxon papers non-story...who knows, there are so many reasons why you'd want to retire the 'ant' nickname).

Tell ya what...you provide some evidence to support your Paleoclimatologists claim or admit that you made the claim simply because you want it to be true,and then I'll point you to the NOAA paper on water vapour.
Posted by mhaze, Monday, 20 March 2017 10:59:57 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
JF Aus

Previously, I acknowledge pollution from farms in relation to the Southern section of the Great BarrierReef; I stated that your comments are wrong in relation to the Gulf of Carpentaria, nothing to comment on further.


mhaze

The denier trick of accusing me of using a different nick name is absolutely not true. I have posted as "ant" ever since joining Online Opinion years ago. Supposition/misinterpretation are what is a constant used by deniers. Diversionary tactics you are not able to break down my apriori statements:

a) We need greenhouse gases in the right proportion to survive. CO2 being important in regulating the respiration rate in humans. Earth would be a sphere of ice without greenhouse gases.
b) Since the Industrial Revolution the rate of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have been increasing; for CO2, it has increased from 280 ppm to over 400 ppm currently.
c) Carbon took millions of years to be sequested; we have disposed of fossil fuels (carbon) in huge quantities in a little over a century.

I have given a number of references in relation to the realtionship between CO2 and water vapour.
Posted by ant, Monday, 20 March 2017 5:45:35 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
ant,

Are you qualified to claim I am wrong?
Posted by JF Aus, Monday, 20 March 2017 8:07:03 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
JF Aus
You ask "Are you qualified to claim I am wrong?"

This is an amazing answer from you to a question I put:

"You ask, ant, "How many factories and internal combustion motors were available before the Industrial Revolution? Does such machinery belch out CO2 and other pollutants?

My answer is this.
Before the Industrial Revolution every household, every house and camp, and every outdoor individual, had a fire to cook food EVERY DAY and often another fire to keep warm when needed."

My advice is think about it more carefully.
Hint, did pre Industrial Revolution populations fly around in jets, or drive cars? Apparently since the Industrial Revolution people do not warm their homes and cook; the population has not increased?? Plus further question marks.
Posted by ant, Tuesday, 21 March 2017 6:42:35 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. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. All

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