Mike Hulme – senior researcher in the Climatic Research Unit, founder of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in 2001.
“to reduce emissions requires more evidence than that humans are altering climate.”
Good thing that never got out.
Mike Hulme – senior researcher in the Climatic Research Unit, founder of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in 2001.
“to reduce emissions requires more evidence than that humans are altering climate.”
Good thing that never got out.
there should be even more warming:
but the data are surely wrong.
Our observing system is inadequate.
–
Tap’ Tap’
is this thing on?
Is there anyone else out there?
Can we cook some AGW books to keep our homes warm?
This subject of Global Warming, AGW, Climate Change, whatever, is starting to get a bit stale. Its advocate have proven their deceit.
What we need is a good old-fashioned lynching.
It was plus 10 degrees in Edmonton yesterday. That’s 30 degrees warmer than normal. There absolutely is climate change.
Can you imagine how much warming there would have been if they’d burned all those emails.
“It was plus 10 degrees in Edmonton yesterday. That’s 30 degrees warmer than normal. There absolutely is climate change.
Posted by: Fred Williams at January 10, 2012 9:45 AM ”
Yes Fred…which is and has been normal for the last 600 MILLION years. Get your at out of Soosuckers a** and smell the coffee! BTW,that did not beat our record high for that day,set in 1986.
For those invoking the “precautionary principle”, I always site the example espoused (perhaps apocryphally) by Catherine the Great. “It is better that a thousand innocents should perish than that one spy go free.” I point out that the worthiness of the precautionary principle is determined entirely upon which side of it one falls i.e. espied despot vs innocent. It also assumes that the risk against which one is taking precautions is in fact real and that the cost of mitigation doesn’t outweigh the cost of the risk itself. When the evidence that humans are warming the planet is flimsy to non-existent, and the historical evidence shows that a warm planet is better than a cold one then even the “precautionary principle” falls flat when applied to AGW.
And Fred, remember, as we’re so often reminded by alarmists during unseasonably cold snaps, “weather isn’t climate.”
Fred
Is a warmer Edmonton better than an Edmonton under a couple of kilometres of ice? (Calgarians may disagree). On this planet, based on uncontroversial empirical evidence, those are your options. Everything else is controversial and now reduced to political noise.
How soon do we get to jail “scientists” and politicians for the inter-generational crime known as the climate scam?
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=290513
Ever heard of El Niño, Fred?
We have El Niño this year and anyone who has spent any time living in Alberta knows that this type of winter weather coincides with the El Niño effect.
It shouldn’t surprise me anymore but I’ve had to tell that to dozens of Warm-mongers this winter and when I ask, “Have you heard of El Niño?” Warmongers invariably reply, “No, what’s that?” and then I tell them to shut their piehole with the Warm-monger talk until they know enough about weather to take part in the conversation.
Sorry Oz but we’re currently in a La Nina condition, not El Nino. The latest ENSO Advisory suggests La Nina will continue until late into the Northern Spring.
But personally I think that it’s the jet stream that is bringing us this atypical warm weather on the Prairies. And I’ve heard not a peep from any expert to pretend they understand how and why the jet stream behaves as it does.
Meat and Potatoes explanation video of El Niño and Al Nina plus their affect on the Jet Stream
catch22 is right: we’re currently in a La Niña, which would normally mean colder than average for much of the continent. However, there are also other forcing mechanisms for what happens over the course of a season, other oscillations. I can’t right now recall which ones are applicable here, and I can’t find mention of it in the quick search I did, but essentially this juxtaposition of a La Niña and this other oscillation hasn’t been seen much before–if at all–and thus the seasonal forecasts of typical La Niña conditions were, at best, guesswork. The problem is, though, that of course the warmistas will take this warmer-than-normal here despite the La Niña as proof positive that we greedy capitalists are causing the planet runaway warming. Wait for it, in 3… 2… 1…
Apparently the Arctic oscilation is in either a “positive or negative” phase….whatever…..bringing cold to the high arctic and moderate temps to temperate North America.
There are so many oscilations of varying terms that do not only coincide but have global effects.
Last count “Pacific Decadal Oscilation” (el nin/la Nina), the “North Pacific Oscillation”, the “Atlantic Oscillation”, and now the newly identified “Arctic Oscilation”.
The earliest identified oscilation is the asian “Monsoons”.
It is confusing…..
Apparently 1954 had similar temperatures.
The town of Cordova in Alaska has had 18 feet of snow this winter. The mayor has called in the army to help out the town. One resident said that she had seen nothing like it in 25 years. 18 feet Toronto.