Don, It seems to me that you had a primary belief about Climate Change before you started your investigations; and that was disbelief. Your reading of the evidence that Climate Change is real and a threat to humanity was therefore cursory and you did not see the atmosphere in cities such as New Delhi and other large cities as any present and future danger because you were not feeling the effects of the smog or breathing the toxic air. Perhaps I could say you are like the doubting Thomas, who did not believe that Jesus had risen from the dead, but had to put his hand into the wound in Christ's side where the spear had pierced him.

The climate hysteria is best left alone if you want to remain sane. The wackjobs have won because the rest of us cannot work together. Democracy is dead because we have not had to fight for it for 70 plus years. Just like the slow but sure return to Left tyranny, there will be a return to times when we are ruled by the environment, and not human values. The environment was extremely dangerous to human life before we tamed it with cheap energy made available by fossil fuels. The wackjobs have chosen the environment over humanity. There is no going back now

There are several factors which may be indicators of global warming. Without postulating the causes, the following are some of them.
All around the world, glaciers are melting, The ice floes in the Arctic sea are diminishing year by year to the extent that the polar bears who rely on their presence are starving and their young are not surviving, The tundra in Siberia is melting and as a result the thawed out organic material is decomposing to produce methane, another greenhouse gas, higher CO2 in the atmosphere is causing the pH of the oceans to fall, resulting in the shell fish shells becoming more fragile. Warming oceans are causing a deterioration of coral reefs, the weather patterns are changing as evidenced by the movement south of the winter high pressure zone.

At present, I would discount sea level change because there has not been enough ice melted on land to make a difference. I suspect there are geological forces at work producing major effects in particular places where tectonic plates meet.

David

The ghost of climate change. I fear, you fear we all fear. The moral panic.
Climate change enters the paranormal.

The Dons of this world are actually the problem.

Dan

I suggest Don engages with the likes of Professor Kevin Anderson @KevinClimate on twitter Or another good one is Peter Kalmus @climatehuman . Both are climate scientistis, the former is also an engineer and energy specialist and previously headed up the Hadley Climate centre in the UK, the latter a climate specialist who works for NASA.

Spend 6 months debating with them and then come back and publish more articles here.

Unlike Don I'm a scientist (physical plus biological disciplines). But I suspect we share strong natural sceptical tendencies. I went through similar thought processes on global warming some 20 years ago, concerned in particular that my colleagues had caught the "galah syndrome" (the flock sticks together). I knew then that a century earlier a leading physical chemist (Arrhenius, around 1900) thought that that increasing CO2 from burning coal might influence atmospheric heat balance. But after appropriate calculations he concluded that human activities were at that time simply not adding enough CO2 to make a difference. I quizzed leading atmospheric scientists, especially about measured increases in solar radiation at earth's surface, and decided to accept that by then the huge increases in CO2 emissions could likely be having an impact. I kept an eye on monthly satellite data for upper atmosphere temperatures and saw they were rising at a pretty constant rate. But it was only about 1.6 degrees Celsius per century, which to me was of no concern. However the flood of popular alarmism and exaggeration that accompanied the data was definitely of concern. Is Don rejecting the legitimate science in reaction to the alarmism? Perhaps. Predictably people like me are dismissed with derogatory labels. “Warmist” is one; “climate denier” is a more common attempt at insult.

So, left with the prospect of continuing gentle temperature rise, what does a logical scientist like me do? Can I be sure that some of the theories that predict faster changes won’t turn out right? On balance I think calm proportionate action is appropriate. If we can stop burning fossil fuels we should. After all, they also produce other emissions that are undisputedly harmful (particulates and gases). And the predictions of a glorious future based on cheap exportable clean renewable energy? On that subject I don’t believe a word.

The average concentration of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere is 0.04%. Man-made CO2 represents between 3 – 4% of that.

Don, you have written many coal-fired essays and articles. And showed how in a waning cycle your "logical rational" made the world much, much warmer!

Or if you will, white is really black? Verily I say unto you, the world is flat? And not the first time scholars and men of letters have so postulated? Relying exclusively on the alphabet soup after their names to persuade the usual dropkicks of the veracity of their impeccable arguments

And an interesting expose of your "sound mind" and intellectual capacity?

That said, none of what you now write, as the devil's advocate, is worth a pinch of it! Given all the important decisions pertaining to climate change and how we confront it? Will be made in boardrooms around the world!

As will how punitive the carbon tariffs need to become? Before the coal/fossil fuel industry gets with the program? But hey don't let that reality stop you from writing or sliding down the "moonbeams' of your mind?
Alan B.

Don, This is a repeat from another thread.
This link may give you some info and also Hendik Svenmark originated
as far as I know the work on Cosmic Rays and clouds.
http://tinyurl.com/yyymp4s8
The steady rise in temperature since late 18th century fits this
observed history rather well.

For Alan B and Lego;
Alan your advocacy of Thorium could be a winner, I just have no knowledge of that.
Lego, the current cycle is about 600 years and the previous cycle
seems to be around 1000 years.
The reason it changes is because it is made up of severn vaguely
connected cycles.
1. The variation in the radiated heat of the sun.
2. The orbit of the earth around the sun.
3. The earths orbit is elliptical.
4. The orbit itself is rotating around the sun.
5. Variation in the tilt of the earth's axis.
6. The sunspot cycle.
7. The maximum level of sunspot plasma ejection from cycle to cycle.

2, 3, 4, and 5 are known as the Milanovitch cycles.
Because of these various cycles the scientists at Turku and Kobe
universities were working on using a Fourier Transform technique to
calculate the length of the cycles and predict them.

The way it works is that cosmic rays entering the earths atmosphere
cause clouds to be formed. When the cycles all work together they
vary the formation of clouds as the earth's magnetic field is disturbed.
The allows more or less cosmic rays into the atmosphere.
When more clouds are formed more radiation is reflected back into
space and the earth is shaded more. So a cool period exists.
When less clouds are formed less heat is lost to space and the earth warms.

That is it in a nutshell.
PS The Fourier technique was used by CSIRO to dig your weak wifi
signal out of the noise.

All around the world, glaciers are melting
VK3AUU,
Better replace the word glaciers with the word brains & you'll be closer to the truth !

I think warming scepticism is up against it when heat records keep getting broken, for example Canada had its hottest day ever recorded yesterday. I believe most of the public is/are convinced except they kid themselves that wind and solar can adequately replace fossil fuels. That said FFs must run out one day as we'll see with east Australian gas. Having a long range plan to replace fossil fuels would be prudent even if it takes some sacrifice now.

Well VK3AAU, the earth has been warming for about 300 years so perhaps
we should expect the glaciers to be melting.

http://tinyurl.com/3wmzwj9u

J Kauppinen was a member of the IPPC until his retirement.

According to their theory the earths temperature has probably peaked
around 2000 but might take another hundred years before we can be
certain that the temperature will fall.

Taswegian, the temperature has been rising for 300 years so whats news ?
So what has caused the record cold weather around the globe ?
Those reports are on too short a time scale. The temperature goes
up and down all the time depending on what cycle dominates.
That is the crux of the matter. Eventually all coincide and that is
the ultimate peak in temperature.
Looks like might be about 2000 but Fourier will supply that answer.

I think Don is right in calling an end to debating the issue. The facts of the matter are no longer of importance.

This occurred when the climate data was no longer telling the story the alarmists required of it. So these days the alarmists just assert that we're all gunna die 40 years from next Tuesday week and refuse to discuss it any further.

Bazz is probably right, that there will be declines in temperature trends over the next few decades. But again that no longer matters. The data will be suppressed and/or altered and/or ignored. Because this isn't about the climate any more. This is about a jihad against the evil fossil fuels.

But the jihad is only being fought in the west. In the sane parts of the world, China, India Africa etc they are continuing the love affair with coal and oil and have no intention of sacrificing the welfare of the their nation on these false western gods.

But in the west, the battle is over. The alarmists have won, for the time being. There will come a time when the majority will come to see that they've been sold a pup. This very week, in ultra-woke California, people are being asked to not charge their electric cars because its putting too much strain on the grid, a grid that has been denuded of fossil fuels.

We in Australia will reach a crisis point some time this decade when the grid will start to wilt. We'll see how popular alarmism is then

Mhaze "We in Australia will reach a crisis point some time this decade when the grid will start to wilt. "

That is about the only true thing in your whole argument.

David

Yes mhaze the warmists have won for the moment. Too many of extreme wealth have hung their money growth on the global warming gravy train.

Fortunately for the next generation, as the earth cools & the alternate power money tree fails to provide the power required for our current standard of living, the the scam will collapse. It will be interesting to see how far the vengeance of the duped masses will go. Will heads roll, or simply fortunes evaporate?

What I can't understand is how they got the thousands who have the math to understand the false foundation of the scam to go along with it. A simple believer until climate gate sowed the seed of doubt, it took me months of hard work by this aging brain to get my math back up to where I could easily follow the formula involved in the radiation absorption of CO2, water vapor & other atmosphere gasses. Once there it is obvious that CO2 in an atmosphere with much higher water vapor content, simply can not do what the theory requires of it.

With past history of much higher temperatures the tipping points rubbish required to make it even partially work falls apart, proving the whole thing a scam.

The question then arises, why do the thousands who must know, go along with the scam, & secondly, what is the objective of the scam? I can only assume it is to put us peasants back on the manor where the elite believe we belong, weened of our luxurious life styles, no other reason makes any sense, that I can see.

One thing is for sure, the planet doesn't give a damn.

VK3AUU

"That is about the only true thing in your whole argument."

Yeah, there were so many errors in my post that you couldn't find one. Just wanting it to be wrong, isn't the same as it being wrong.

Speaking of being hoplessly wrong, you wrote (among a lot of other drivel)..."The ice floes in the Arctic sea are diminishing year by year to the extent that the polar bears who rely on their presence are starving and their young are not surviving,"

The fact is that polar bear numbers are increasing and have been for a few decades now.

Hasbeen,
"why do the thousands who must know, go along with the scam,"

Thousands or millions? But they go along because to do otherwise is career destroying. And going along is career enhancing. That's why the majority of the so-called 'deniers' are older, either retired or at the pinnacle of their career with nothing to lose.
On the other hand, going along with AGW can make the mediocre rich and famous. Look at Mann or the thorough unscrupulous Lowendowsky. Mediocrities who made a career of telling the alarmists what they wanted to hear.

mhaze opines "Bazz is probably right, that there will be declines in temperature trends over the next few decades."

Meanwhile towns in Canada closer to the pole than the equator are experiencing record temperatures and it is killing people.

Bazz is probably right, that there will be declines in temperature trends over the next few decades.

"Hundreds of people are likely to have died as a result of record-breaking temperatures in Canada and the US Northwest, authorities say.

While more than 60 fatalities in the US state of Oregon have been linked to the heat, the Canadian province of British Columbia experienced a 195 per cent increase in sudden deaths.

Lisa Lapointe, British Columbia’s chief coroner, said there had been a minimum of 486 “sudden and unexpected deaths” over the five days to Wednesday.

This comes after Lytton, a village in the province, recorded the highest-ever temperature in Canada earlier this week, with the mercury reaching 49.6C. It was evacuated on Wednesday, after it became engulfed by a fast-moving wildfire."

Blind fools.

Here is a little story. Not long ago when we had cold weather we were
told that it is weather NOT climate.
Now the activists are telling us this Canadian heat is global warming !
Again, we can say;
Now that other places have hot weather it is weather NOT climate.

Unfortunately all of here will not see the truth exposed.
We might in the next few years at least get an inkling of what is about to happen

Bazz,

You completely misunderstand the 'science' here. When its unusually hot, its climate. When its unusually cold it weather. T'was always thus. And this is how the hoax is maintained.

For reference to those still vaguely interested in the facts....

http://blogs.ancestry.com/cm/files/2015/02/heatwaveindex.jpg

I don't know what caused the 1930s spike but it musta been CO2 - there's no other possible explanation </sarc>

Dear mhaze,

Geez mate, you really have drunk the Koolaid haven't you.

The guys mixing up the cordial must really have a good laugh. This video from Rollie Williams sets out pretty nicely how you lot have been led by the nose on this issue and you as still chirping their tune.

http://youtu.be/MondapIjAAM

Dear Hasbeen,

Naturally a single weather event doesn't represent the climate, but when they are far more on the hot rather than the cold side they show a trend completely in line with global warming.

“Over the past 20 years, Americans have been twice as likely to sweat through record-breaking heat rather than shiver through record-setting cold, a new Associated Press data analysis shows.

The AP looked at 424 weather stations throughout the Lower 48 states that had consistent temperature records since 1920 and counted how many times daily hot temperature records were tied or broken and how many daily cold records were set. In a stable climate, the numbers should be roughly equal.

Since 1999, the ratio has been two warm records set or broken for every cold one.”

http://phys.org/news/2019-03-ap-hot-falling-cold.html

SR We are wasting our time trying to convince these unbelievers. They will not accept the evidence which I have given. They come up with a raft of untruths to support their stand. All this physical evidence is out there, you don't have to be a scientist to see it. The earth isn't flat, the universe doesn't rotate around the earth. Anthropogenic global warming is not some conspiracy theory, it is real.
David

Dear VK3AUU,

It was a fair point being made about weather not being climate which hopefully I addressed. However the ideological positions some posters have taken will never respond well to facts and figures. Just how the world is unfortunately.