400ppm

[Job]

so after decades of bullshit talk and a lot of hot air about doing something about it..we have now hit 400ppm and its rising faster than ever....starts up new 4.7 jeep.

 

[dysfunction]

What?

 

[BloodOmen]

 

[dysfunction]

Oh you on about this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22486153

 

[Tom]

meh. Even if we are responsible (something which I'm still not convinced of), we'd be better spending money dealing with the consequences than we are trying to stop it.

 

[Job]

Im sure they know what theyre doing..but having the measuring station next to a volcanoe does seem a little odd.

 

[BloodOmen]

Im sure they know what theyre doing..but having the measuring station next to a volcanoe does seem a little odd.

"Why Mauna Loa? Early attempts to measure CO2 in the USA and Scandinavia found that the readings varied a lot due to the influence of growing plants and the exhaust from motors. Mauna Loa is ideal because it is so remote from big population centres. Also, on tropical islands at night, the prevailing winds blow from the land out to sea, which effect brings clean, well-mixed Central Pacific air from high in the atmosphere to the observatory. This removes any interference coming from the vegetation lower down on the island."

Method behind their madness

 

[Job]

I kinda thought it was done by sensors all over the planet..then averaged out..im going over there with a giant bottle of co2 and scare the crap outta them.

 

[Chilly]

ZOMG we passed 397 the other day, didn't see any stories about that.

 

[Job]

Look up the word milestones

 

[Chilly]

Look up the word milestones

So just because we use base 10 and journalists seem incapable of using percentage change over time, I have to give a toss?

 

[Raven]

I couldn't care less. I will be dead in 50 years, give or take.

 

[rynnor]

Its all a load of shite is my considered opinion - world temperatures have shown no significant growth for 20 years yet CO2 rose steadily - thus no causal link - global warming panic over.

 

[Job]

It doesnt matter..no on will ever do anything about it unless it makes them rich.

 

[Athan]

Its all a load of shite is my considered opinion - world temperatures have shown no significant growth for 20 years yet CO2 rose steadily - thus no causal link - global warming panic over.

Oh dear, are you one of those people that believe the major climate change sceptics when they cherry pick a recent hottest year as the start of data series, thus showing no real change, or even a decline in temperatures ?

For a recent example, and rebuttal : http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Pete McMartin Climate change deniers cherry picking/8117271/story.html

 

[rynnor]

Oh dear, are you one of those people that believe the major climate change sceptics when they cherry pick a recent hottest year as the start of data series, thus showing no real change, or even a decline in temperatures ?

For a recent example, and rebuttal : http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Pete McMartin Climate change deniers cherry picking/8117271/story.html

Its flatlined - it was going up until the mid 90s then it effectively stopped. No need to cherry pick it just doesnt match the predictions for the last 20 years.

Lots of weasel words to try to explain it but lacking a major volcanic eruption theres no major influence that should have been able to do that if the original idea of the amount of effect of CO2 on temperature was correct.

No doubt CO2 has a minor effect but the reality is that it wasnt responsible for the increases from the 60s to the mid 90s nor for the flatlining since. Cling to a tattered discredited theory if you like.

Lots of good funding for it but eventually the whole scam will fade away to a footnote in the history of science as will the careers of its supporters.

 

[Athan]

Really?

http://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/warming_world

 

[Cadelin]

Really?

http://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/warming_world

There isn't much point arguing with Rynnor he is an epic retard. Despite the fact that you have managed to point out what he is saying is rubbish with a citation from NASA he will keep arguing. The best thing to do would be to ignore him, except you can't because he is a moderator.

 

[rynnor]

There isn't much point arguing with Rynnor he is an epic retard.

Lol - I like your well reasoned discussion style - pretty much what I expect from a deluded believer.

I am happy to wait until I'm proven correct eventually - he who laughs last etc...

 

[leggy]

Lol - I like your well reasoned discussion style - pretty much what I expect from a deluded believer.

I am happy to wait until I'm proven correct eventually - he who laughs last etc...

The moon landing didn't happen, the moon landing didn't happen, I'm not going to die, I'm not going to die......

 

[rynnor]

The moon landing didn't happen, the moon landing didn't happen, I'm not going to die, I'm not going to die......

Science has never been about conscensus - wherever you look there are competing theories except in one very politicised area...

Still have fun being a sheep - flat earther

 

[Raven]

Oh dear, are you one of those people that believe the major climate change sceptics when they cherry pick a recent hottest year as the start of data series, thus showing no real change, or even a decline in temperatures ?

For a recent example, and rebuttal : http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/Pete McMartin Climate change deniers cherry picking/8117271/story.html

The weather has been shit in the UK for the last few years. Global warming my arse. Where is my summer?!?!?

 

[Raven]

Though I do kind of agree. If you sign up to the whole man made "We are all going to fucking dies because of too many mother fucking lynx cans!" (or whatever it is they are banging on about this week) then it's an easy funding source for Joe scientist.

I don't like the way climate change science sets out to prove that it is man made and rejects anything to the contrary. Anything suggesting it isn't loses it's funding and gets discredited. The fact that CO2 and temperature has fluctuated massively in short periods of time over millenia seems to get ignored.

Horse shit science at the moment. Just a free ride for post-grads.

 

[Job]

I think its fair to say the theory is in tatters..if not scientifically but with public opinion..ever since it started as the cooling theory back in the 70s..I remember dire warnings on the telly from hippy scientists and eco activists telling us wed all ben under an ice sheet by the 90s.
Every time reality fails to line up with the predictions they come up with more and more convuluted reasons for the discrepencies that is becoming to border on desperation..tie this up with childish name calling of opossing views and my bullshit detector is in the red.

 

[rynnor]

The worst effect of the vested interests and the terrible hostility is that it goes beyond climatology and seeks to supress anything that could one day undermine the theory.

I have an interest in Solar Physics and became aware a few years ago of an interesting theory that identified a downward trend in the magnetic strength of sunspots. It said nothing about earths climate but inherent in the theory was a suggestion that the sun was heading for a maunder minimum type extended period of low solar activity.

The theory made some predictions which have subsequently proven to be true - in normal times the authors would be lauded but in the current climate they have struggled to get research funds and most ominously have been blocked for spurious reasons in the peer review process - it's both obvious and disgusting but history teaches us that the truth cannot be supressed indefinitely.

 

[Job]

Yes, regardless of who's correct, it's a shameful intrusion of political correctness into the scientific method that should have people up in arms, but everyone who points it out get's labelled a denying witch who is in the pockets of big oil.

 

[dysfunction]

Really?

http://climate.nasa.gov/interactives/warming_world

Yes that graph does show the world is warming.

But it could also be misleading....if you looked far enough back the graph could look like this:


Which then indicates people have no influence on global warming...but this could be wrong too. Who is to say is correct as there is no proff one way or another.
All we know is from 1880 temps have been rising...

 

[Shagrat]

it was doomed as a scientific debate the minute politicians got involved. I have a deeply cynical view of anything put out that shows any evidence of man made warming now unfortunately.

It's just an excuse to tax the crap out of the man in the street until that particular theory is discredited

 

[leggy]

Science has never been about conscensus - wherever you look there are competing theories except in one very politicised area...

Agreed.. we always need to challenge common consensus. I just don't agree with your challenge this time.

Still have fun being a sheep - flat earther

Sharing a common consensus does not make someone a sheep ... Challenging it without a valid argument, however, does make someone a bit of a tool

 

[Raven]

The problem is, even with a valid argument they get shut out. If someones science does not back up the common view it gets ignored or ridiculed.

Climate science is nearly as bad as religion in the dark ages.