Hey Lego, as an electrician you obviously have to have enough math to understand the scam. These poor fools like Mr Green, obviously detailed by some lefty/green group to be this quarters fool attempting to justify the unjustifiable is floundering with something he can't understand.

It is interesting that in my youth, [where's my violin], kids straight from junior high school could easily manage an electrical apprenticeship math. Today senior high high graduates with very high achiever math, require a remedial math course to manage the the apprenticeship math.

Today we have environmental science graduates, with a bachelor of science degree who could not make change from a $5 bus ticket from a $10 note, with out a calculator. So don't be too hard on the Mr Greens, & SRs of this world, they aren't capable of understanding the theory, or the math, so have only rhetoric or prose to try to hide their ignorance.

Just like that fool Shorten, who did not know what red Julia said, but supported it completely, these fools have been told what to believe, & boy aren't they dedicated in that.

Hi Steelie.

Is the climate changing? Answer, Yes. The climate has always changed. Specifically, our planet warms and cools, warms and cools, in regular, cyclic events roughly every 1000 years. The last warming period was the Medieval Warm Period 1000 years ago, followed by cooling in the Little Ice Age, 500 years ago. Our planet is now in another scheduled warming period. If the last 9 warming periods are a reliable guide to our present warming period (they should be) then our planet will warm another 2 degrees before it reverses into a serious ice age.

And you know what? There is not a single, solitary climate scientist who does not know that. It is part of the historical record, and in our present free democratic society, the State can not just air brush the historical record away.

The planet it warming. I don't even know why the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, or NOAA are "adjusting" the figures to prove it is warming. I suspect it is because it is not warming fast enough to scare entire populations to turn away from free market democracies, and instead submit to socialist totalitarian control.

Whether climate change has anything to do with our present bushfire crisis is something that nobody can answer. Increased temperatures might cause increased desertification, or it might cause increased precipitation through increased evaporation. Or it might be that this is just another bad drought and bushfire season of which Australia has already had plenty.

The Big Lie being propagated to naive and easily led people like your good self, is that climate change is caused by increased human induced atmospheric CO2. That is total bunkum. If anthropogenic CO2 is the main reason for climate change, then what anthropogenic increases in CO2 caused the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, or every other preceding warm period going back millions of years??

HIGW is the biggest hoax since The Stolen Generations, or Hitler's claim that the Jews burned down the Reichstag. And you fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.

LEGO:

>" If anthropogenic CO2 is the main reason for climate change, then what anthropogenic increases in CO2 caused the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, or every other preceding warm period going back millions of years??"

First, you haven't proposed a method or causation for these warming periods. They 'just happen' in your story.

Second, the Roman warming isn't really that warm. Look up the temperature proxies. I mean, did you even start with wikipedia?

_______________________

Theophrastus (371 – c. 287 BC) wrote that date trees could grow in Greece if they were planted, but that they could not set fruit there. That is the case today, which suggests that South Aegean mean summer temperatures in the 4th and 5th centuries BC were within a degree of modern temperatures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Warm_Period
_______________________

Third, note, it's not as warm as today then.

Fourth, it's NOT GLOBAL.

Fifth, it was variations in the sun.

Sixth, it's isn't the sun today, as they've studied that. The sun's activity was decreasing late last century while the planet was cooking. (Imagine that, it's only consistent with the KNOWN LAWS OF PHYSICS of CO2 and the Radiative Forcing Equation.)

Seventh, GROW UP!

Dude, if you haven't even bothered to read the WIKI in the subject then your credibility is shot. As the reporter said of the Hindenburg, "Oh the humanity!"

"Since then various denier websites had done a Chinese whispers number on it and the 40 years became 20 without a mention of the doubling of CO2."

Actually, that's not true. What actually happened is that the interviewer said 20 years. At the time no one disputed the point. Only when the 20 years was approaching and it was clear the predictions were utterly laughably wrong did the author suddenly realise that he got it wrong and the prediction was 40 years. I imagine someone talking to the author ..."Nice career you've go there..it'd be a shame to loose it. Now was it 20 or 40 years?"

So contra SR's made-up assertions, it wasn't "denier websites" wot done it. In SR world, even when its clear the so-called deniers were innocent, they're guilty because....reasons.

So the author now admits to getting it wrong. I wonder what'll happen when the 40 year anniversary approaches and the predictions remain laughably wrong. A job for Winston Smith I expect.

Meanwhile it'd be interesting to find out how SR got it wrong. Did he stop looking once he'd found a version of the fable that he liked (SR does that a lot) or did he know the truth and just hoped to slip it through anyway. I guess we'll never know.

Just a word of warning LEGO.

Don't bother getting into an argument with Max about the various warm periods. He doesn't want them to be true, so refuses to accept any data that shows they are true.

The last time I discussed it with him I showed him a large number of papers from China and elsewhere that showed that the Medieval WP and Roman WP were real. His response? He simply refused to look at those papers. Simply refused!! And continued pretending there was no data about the RWP and MWP being global.

My kids have a book about a chap who says all flowers are red. He makes the claim by refusing to see or acknowledge any non-red flowers.

Ditto re Max's climate hysteria.

Dear Lego,

What on earth does the Medieval Warming period have to do with our current situation?

We are marching toward a doubling of CO2 levels in our atmosphere due to human activities and you need to come up with a decent explanation as to why such a raising the concentration of the second most important green house gas will not result in a warming planet.

If you want to deny the physics then go ahead but that is where most thinking people will stop listening to you. If you want to accept the physics but put the position that other factors were having a negative impact on global temperatures thus the projected warming will not be significant then put your case.

You failed to deliver which of your list we should review next.

Dear mhaze,

Yes it appears the interviewer admits he got it wrong when being interviewed for the Salon magazine;

“Michaels also has the facts wrong about a 1988 interview of me by Bob Reiss, in which Reiss asked me to speculate on changes that might happen in New York City in 40 years assuming CO2 doubled in amount. Michaels has it as 20 years, not 40 years, with no mention of doubled CO2. Reiss verified this fact to me, but he later sent the message:”
““I went back to my book and re-read the interview I had with you. I am embarrassed to say that although the book text is correct, in remembering our original conversation, during a casual phone interview with a Salon magazine reporter in 2001 I was off in years. What I asked you originally at your office window was for a prediction of what Broadway would look like in 40 years, not 20. But when I spoke to the Salon reporter 10 years later probably because I’d been watching the predictions come true, I remembered it as a 20 year question.“”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/22/a-little-known-but-failed-20-year-old-climate-change-prediction-by-dr-james-hansen/

Nothing to do with Hansen.

But like you Watts leaves out the doubling of CO2 when discussing this. Is this kind of deception all that you guys have left? Shame.