The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Badjelly]

I'd like someone to explain how the mean oceanic sea level can be different in different parts of the same ocean.

Be careful what you wish for, I may just do that.

But you may well be right about the island in question. There are places on Earth where crust is sinking or rising much faster than the rate of global-mean sea level rise, which is currently ~ 2-3 mm/year.

[Grahameeboy]

The only way it could weigh more is if it teleports itself do a planet of different mass as it melts.

Don't call us..........

[Patar]

Quasi,
having done no research on this as I don't currently have the resources, when you state CO2 levels were >4000ppm in excess of 600 million years ago, there are a lot of factors that influenced global temps, not least of which is suspended particles in the air.
I am of the belief that there were a lot more volcanic eruptions back then which would mean higher CO2 levels and other greenhouse gases, but also dust in the atmosphere.

IIRC the Mt. Saint Helens eruption reduced global temperatures by 1-2 degrees C

[Badjelly]

IIRC the Mt. Saint Helens eruption reduced global temperatures by 1-2 degrees C

Mt St Helens was pretty small bikkies as volcanic eruptions go, and I don't think it had a discernible effect on global temperatures. However Pinatubo & Mt Hudson in the early 1990s, and El Chichón in the early 1980s did have an effect.

[Quasievil]

guys guys guys, see what you NEED to realise is that Im only on page 48 the book is nearly 300 pages long I haven't even got started yet, so sit back and enjoy the show.

Currently on about the sun and its variation in spinning Axis relating to variations in temperatures.................no points to make yet but I wont be far away.

[Quasievil]

Oh dear Quasi, you have it bad.

I've italicised the emotive elements of your post. No disrespect but.......the words and descriptions you use are common to conspiracy theorists and non-scientists. What you have said above is that everyone who disagrees with you is a fool or a scammer. The words used are pejorative and histrionic.

Contrast this with posts by Mikkel and Jantar (among others). Their explanations are rational, logical, unemotive, and calm. This approach is consistent with scientific debate and echos the reasoned research you can find in abundance on climate change.

Go to the web and you'll see anti-climate change proponents rely heavily on ad hominen attacks, sarcasm, cynicism, conspiracies, and deception. For example your post saying an English High court judge proved Al Gore was wrong - that's completely incorrect but has been repeated so often I don't blame you for being misled.

If you want a balanced starter point, go to our very own Dennis Dutton's site Climate Debate Daily - no sides taken, read what you choose. http://climatedebatedaily.com/

Maybe but it is a big subject one actual FACT I can claim to be accurate so far on my quest is that the science is NOT I repeat NOT conclusive, therefore any attitudes relate to the Pro warming peoples agendas to take my money, its my fucking money and if any fucker wants it the reasons better be fucking good, to date they aint !!

[Mikkel]

guys guys guys, see what you NEED to realise is that Im only on page 48 the book is nearly 300 pages long I haven't even got started yet, so sit back and enjoy the show.

Oh dear, so we're going to have 3 times as much more bollocks added to this thread than has already been?

Mate, make sure you engage your critical thinking before reading that stuff. The author is not a scientist and you have to judge for yourself whether he is, at least to some degree, objective as well as what his agenda is if he isn't. According to some sources he's even a nutcase...

[Jantar]

On the TV the other night they showed part of a doco 2 hippies produced about an island near Papua that is being "flooded by Global Warming".
I'd like someone to explain how the mean oceanic sea level can be different in different parts of the same ocean.
i.e. why isn't Takapuna being flooded?

-The island is actually on a subducting tectonic plate.

I also saw the pictures of the wave that rolled in, and contiuned to roll in and just kept coming. There was no sweep back, it just moved on relentlessly. Just as one would expect from a sieche wave rather than a normal oceanic wave. It certainly wasn't a rise in average sea levels that caused this wave.

[Quasievil]

Oh dear, so we're going to have 3 times as much more bollocks added to this thread than has already been?

Mate, make sure you engage your critical thinking before reading that stuff. The author is not a scientist and you have to judge for yourself whether he is, at least to some degree, objective as well as what his agenda is if he isn't. According to some sources he's even a nutcase...

Dont you worry young fella Im on the fence but to date I cannot find anything conclusive that encourages me to think that the pro group is accurate, everything noted by the pro group is countered by the anti group and the reverse is true as well, but like I say only one group wants our money so they have to prove it to me

[Badjelly]

According to some sources he's even a nutcase...

Nice to see you getting into the ad hominems now, mate.

Mind you, just because people say he's a nutcase doesn't mean he isn't.

[Badjelly]

Dont you worry young fella Im on the fence ...

Really? :tui:

[Mikkel]

Nice to see you getting into the ad hominems now, mate.

Mind you, just because people say he's a nutcase doesn't mean he isn't.

Oh, I was referring to one of the reviews of Aircon that was posted a bit back. I don't know the fella so how could I possibly judge.

...although if Ian Wishart's own words are anything to go by I'd have to say he's at least a borderline nutcase, somewhat lacking in appreciation of irony and most definitely a hypocrite.

[Mikkel]

Dont you worry young fella Im on the fence but to date I cannot find anything conclusive that encourages me to think that the pro group is accurate, everything noted by the pro group is countered by the anti group and the reverse is true as well, but like I say only one group wants our money so they have to prove it to me

Oh, by all means be skeptical. However, I'd have to question your intellect if you base your skepticism on the words of someone who writes stuff like this:

What they [“wild greens”] really mean is that they want ordinary families and kids to become extinct, leaving space for the Green elite to run the planet and enjoy exclusive bird-watching excursions while feasting on the bones of six year olds who’d earlier been sold to Asian brothels.

And at the end of the day everyone wants everyone else's money...

[Badjelly]

...everything noted by the pro group is countered by the anti group...

Yes, that's the strategy. Deny everything. I wasn't there and I didn't kill him, well I may have injured him a bit, but I didn't mean to, and anyway he deserved it, and anyway, what about that other bloke that murdered 15 people, that's much worse than what I did, not that I'm admitting I did it, because I wasn't even there and you can't prove anything.

Or, from the climate change denial people: (a) global warming isn't happening, (b) even if it is, its entirely natural and within the bounds of natural variability, (c) well, even if its not natural, it is modest in nature and not a threat, (d) even if anthropogenic warming should turn out to be pronounced as projected, it will sure be good for us, leading to abundant crops and a healthy environment, and (e) well, it might actually be really bad, but hey, its unstoppable anyway.

But good news for the anti people, at the beginning of last month, one of the leading climate change blogs admitted the denialists were right all along:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...o-our-readers/

[Badjelly]

Oh, by all means be skeptical. However, I'd have to question your intellect if you base your skepticism on the words of someone who writes stuff like this:

You've got to admit it's catchy. As villains the Wild Green Elite beat the Running Dogs of Imperialism any day. The name is just so much better.