Safe Speed Forums

I can help you out there: Climate changes.

There you go, something true.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Oh my god! A REVELATION!!!!

But it MUST be Man's fault - Man is the most important and influential thing on the planet....

Edited to correct slightly amusing type

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

I discovered something new today. Saturn, Neptune and Pluto (as well as mars) are also showing signs of "global warming".

What could all these planets (or whatever pluto is) possibly have in common that could cause warming???

It's all the CO2 from the space probes man has sent to these planets causing their climates to change.

Curse mankind for its destruction of the universe!

hmmm... an interglalactic death ray! Only they miscalculated the amount of power required, so rather than causing instentanious vapourisation, it just warms things up slightly.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Can we have a reference to that please?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It's been known for some time that Mars is warming, here's one article from 2003 http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html

I suppose that if this is being put down to increased solar activity then other planets are likely to be affected to a greater or lesser degree as well, although I have not heard them being mentioned directly.

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

And over on Yahoo-"Global warming 'swindle' exposed"

The theory of man-made global warming has become such a powerful political force that other explanations for climate change have been largely ignored, according to a documentary being screened on Thursday night.

Changes in the Earth's climate may be better explained by the sun's radiation rather than the carbon dioxide emissions from our cars, homes and factories, argues Martin Durkin, whose film is being shown on Channel 4.

Swings in the planet's temperature took place long before the burning

(Advertisement)
of fossil fuels, say experts in The Great Global Warming Swindle.
So the "single-minded focus" on cutting carbon emissions may have little impact on climate change - but could stifle the development of poorer countries which cannot afford other ways of producing energy.

A number of "leading" scientists who disagree with the prevailing consensus on the greenhouse effect were brought together for the film, said its producers.

It features nine professors from institutions including the space agency Nasa, the International Arctic Research Centre, the Institut Pasteur and the universities of London, Ottawa, Jerusalem, Winnipeg, Alabama and Virginia.

Speaking in the documentary, climatologist Tim Ball said: "The ice core record goes to the very heart of the problem we have. They said if CO2 increases in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas, then the temperature will go up.

"But the ice core record shows exactly the opposite, so the fundamental assumption, the most fundamental assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans, is shown to be wrong."

Increased CO2 levels are actually a result of temperature rises, not their cause, and this alternate view is rarely heard, argue experts in the film.

Professor and director of the Earth System Science Center John Christy said: "I've often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well I am one scientist, and there are many, that simply think that is not true

read it here

yes, here - and my earlier post is incorrect, at least as far as the linked article is concerned: it should be jupiter not saturn and one of Netpune's moons, not neptune itself.

High precision ? Surely you mean fudged to fit.

They openly admit that they don't understand all the interactions or even all the inputs yet they build computer models that fit the past and estimate the future - 30 minutes at a time. They take the output and shove it back in the front and start again. After 525960 iterations they have the result for 30 years time.

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/U/ukweather2080/3_predicting_global.html

Now lets suspend sensible belief and assume that despite the undefined inputs and interactions that the model manages to be accurate to 99.999% accurate for one iteration. This would be an amazing achievement for a complex model simulation (in fact if the maths is really that complicated this figure could be hard to achieve due to rounding errors in the program alone!).

So taking this highly unlikely premise of an almost perfect model how accurate is the result after 525960 iterations?

Potential error margin is the accuracy of one iteration to the power of the number of iterations or more than 192 times the temperature difference in the final output result!!

The computer models are clearly artificially tweaked just to keep them in check and as such of little value because the tweaking can be made to influence whatever result you wish to achieve.

Yes the climate is changing.
Yes we are no doubt indirectly interfering with the climate.
Are we the major source of the influence on the climate. Who knows?


On the balance of actual evidence it would seem that there is a lot of past evidence that the climate changes from time to time but there is little more than political (and often fanatical) propaganda backed by parties with large pockets and big agendas that suggest we are anything other than a minor influence.

I was in Tesco's last night. "An inconvenient truth" was on the budget section at £5.95. Pretty crap for a so called award winning film.

I expect it to be in the 99p clearance rack in a few weeks.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Is it me or is this program asking – and answering – exactly the right questions?

Yup.............thats what I thought.

My final thoughts were..... Now shut the f*ck up

Interersting to see what was deleted out the IPCC report

Its what happens next that is the most important. Are more journalists now going to start finding out the truth for themselves and get more media exposure to the lie

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Excellent program on C4 which exposed the political driving force behind the new religion. It's not science just a way of political forces exerting control over the masses.

Funny, I've never believed in AGW. It's all too convenient.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

{My bold}

Right-O, lets look at two words here:- 'Vested' and 'Interest'...

In their part of the Great GCC scam, the oil companies will hike prices 'In order to discourage excess use of fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions'. They will then sell the same amount of oil at a vastly inflated price and all the boys and girls that have helped perpetrate this con-trick will get some 'luvly jubbly' for their co-conspiracy/credulity.

Watching the programme tonight has fully substantiated all the research I have done, out of my own interest, that shows the premise of GCC to be built on shifting sand by men of straw.

Cosmic rays and water vapour, not ministerial hot air!

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...

I agree, I think. And I know we could demolish the case for speed cameras honestly in 90 minutes TV.

But the AGW movement is huge. Can it truly be honestly deconstructed in 90 minutes? What do the sophisticated AGW proponents have to say about the evidence and analysis offered? I'm definitely an AGW skeptic, but that really did seem too easy.

I suppose what I'm really asking is: Is the AGW case really as flawed as that?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

When I saw this programme advertised several days ago, my first thought was "what if there were another show a week later entitled The Great Speed Camera Swindle?"

No doubt we'll see. All I can say is that it seemed to tie together all the separate threads that I've come across over the last few years, all of which chipped away at some aspect of AGW theory. Seeing it all put together into one coherent whole like that seemed pretty damning.

But perhaps the best thing of all is the fact that C4 were willing to commission and screen it in the first place, taking on the whole of the establishment and proving that - thank heavens - free thinking isn't quite dead yet!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

My prediction is that the establishment will...

1. discredit it by means of ad hominem attacks on the author and contributors.
2. Pick holes in (irrelevant) details about the points raised in order to give the appearance that it was littered with errors and therefore unreliable; whilst ignoring the principal issues.
3. Sidestep the whole thing (again) and shift to a new theory that meets the required political objectives, and buys them another 5 or 10 years to exploit it before the truth gradually emerges.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

The process sounds remarkably familiar......

I find this attempt to debunk the program before it went to air.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2026091,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1

notice they "science" editor got a good kicking from the readers...and rightly so.

If more people were prepared to bit back maybe journalists may be more reluctant to propergate this kind of bad reporting.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills