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 > Mischievous misinformation or scientific debate? > Comments

Mischievous misinformation or scientific debate? : Comments

By David Karoly, published 5/5/2008

An ice age is definitely not going to occur in the 21st century! Instead global average temperatures will continue to increase.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Most of the worlds glaciers are disappearing and the North West Passage is likely to be open this year for the first time. The Murray Darling river system is still drying up. How can anyone still maintain the planet is cooling? Science is all about observation and it is now easy to see the effects of global warming.
Posted by John Pratt, Monday, 5 May 2008 10:18:12 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
Karoly says "That gives an average daily number of sunspots in January 2008 of 3.4, 2.1 in February and 9.3 in March 2008. "

Pity he left out 2.9 in April. But sun spots are just part of the solar picture.

Pity he cannot consider the bigger picture if we are to understand the solar/cosmic influence. The IPCC selectively only looks at solar irradiance on selectively short timelines/data and ignores other essential solar "pulses". This represents one very good reason to study the aa index of geomagnetic activity which has doubled and been in an uptrend for over 100 years. Only a halfwit would ignore this fact. The last thirty years of this index seems to indicate signs of instability or what one may call the shakes. This could mean a turning point after a rather long very active period. The present extended solar minimum could be confirmation .... we can only speculate but it is not going unnoticed by many leading scientists.

Pity he explains recent cooling as a confined La Niņa event where he opportunistically assumes winds mysteriously increase in speed in the eastern to central Pacific producing more cold water from below being forced up, cooling the ocean surface. i.e Any cooling is but some localised, selective weather event coming from beneath the Pacific ocean's surface to AGWers.

Karoly then says "While those errors are bad enough, the major flaw in Chapman’s opinion is trying to infer long-term climate trends from short-term (one-year) variations of global temperature." This is the pure hypocrisy we always get from an AGWer. The problem for the warmers with this argument is precisely that they only have a few hundred years worth of historical data and but twenty years of recent warming, which may or may not have been accurately recorded. They are trying to apply that to climatic behavior that has had its own cyclic changes, unaffected by man, for eons.

I simply see Karoly and AGWers as opportunists and the true deniers.
Posted by Keiran, Monday, 5 May 2008 11:19:12 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
I saw an article about Al Gore having an interest in owning shares in carbon trading.

"The Murray Darling system is still drying up."

From reading the early accounts of explorers they had to portage their boats over dry stretches of the murray river during the summer. It has only be the building of locks and weirs that has enabled to murray to flow all year round.

According to other reports I have read is that the Australian continent was a much wetter place, 40 to 50,000 years ago.

So Australia has been drying out for more than a few thousand years.
Posted by JamesH, Monday, 5 May 2008 11:21:09 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
And before anyone attacks Professor Karoly, they should read this piece.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Is-Pacific-Decadal-Oscillation-the-Smoking-Gun.html
Posted by Q&A, Monday, 5 May 2008 11:38:26 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
I can assure readers that the IPCC has no agenda, other than science. Why on Earth would they? Scientists are not in the job as scaremongers and it is simply not in their culture to be hyperbolic. We are talking about deadly serious scientists who spend their lives trying to get to the truth of the matter.

It would be nice to forget the sceptics, few as they are, and focus on how society and governments should respond to the real situation. Unfortunately, the sceptics have a much higher media profile than they ought, because media traditionally tries to give 2 sides to an argument, even if one side is a mere handful. So the sceptics do have an ability to retard the cultural shift, and in doing so will be morally responsible (albeit mostly in ignorance) for the consequences - whether that be megadeaths or major economic fallout or inevitable natural disasters that follow.

Before guilt-tripping the sceptics too far, I must add that social change is ALWAYS accompanied by an angry and sceptical response amongst those who find it difficult to confront the information that is before them. This reaction is completely natural.

Beyond those who have a vested interest in the status quo there will always be those innocent respondents who psychologically can't bring themselves to accept deep change. It's simply called 'denial' - a much studied subject.

We only have to see the enormous backlash against those who tried to emancipate slaves and against the feminist movement. A serious medical prognosis will bring on the same 'denial' reaction from those who aren't equipped to handle the bad news.

In time, the cultural change happens regardless, but in the case of climate change, when time is the essence, the sceptics have the ability to deepen the crisis.

Be it on their heads if they know what they are doing, have sympathy for those who don't.
Posted by gecko, Monday, 5 May 2008 12:21:27 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
Wow its humorous to see the High Priests of climate change (warming and cooling) at each others throats as they interpret the data differently. Whenever you use the pseudo science to convince the gullible of evolution you will end up with this point scoring. Very amusing to see the latest Priests saying that GW is on hold for 10 years. I suppose as long as you have the media and our national broadcasters willing to give the airtime we will see the pollies bowing to the latest anointed High Priests. Where is Al Gore and Tim Flannery now?
Posted by runner, Monday, 5 May 2008 12:43:55 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
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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