another post at tallblokes

thefordprefect says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Thank you Tom. The truth of your comments is obvious. For example:
Once upon a time Steve McIntyre usefully analysed climate papers. His website over the last year has degenerated into a defamation fest.
WUWT has turned into series of very opinionated posts which even watts has distanced himself.
And the slayers sites are just unbelievable!

Climate science will never be able to show 100% proof that AGW is true or for that matter false. There are too many variables and too much noise in the data. Predicting the future is just about impossible. reaching backwards in time before the thermometers were correctly sited is just about impossible – tree-mometers clam-mometers,ice-mometers all have their problems!. Proving the existence or not of MWP is not possible.

The science of GHGs is understood. But just how much warming will result if CO2 increases – are the feedbacks negative or positive?

We need scientific debate from the best minds and we need communicators to educate us masses about the science.

Many blogs even limit debate by banning posters who seem to me to be talking calmly and sensibly but are against the blog “theme”.

A warming world is really a problem even if some say 1°C increase would improve their environment. They seem to forget about the extra energy powering “weather” and forget that those living on the edge of thermal disaster may be pushed over that edge.

There is only the earth on which we live, and running uncontrolled experiments on its climate does not seem sensible at all.

Free and open debate is needed!!!!!!!!!!

Advertisements

9 Comments

  1. Posted 2015/01/07 at 08:00 | Permalink | Reply

    Approved, sorry for the delay.

    • Posted 2015/12/11 at 13:43 | Permalink | Reply

      thefordprefect says:
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.

      December 11, 2015 at 12:47 pm

      “That governments focus instead on encouraging means of ensuring that under-developed and developing nations have full access to the cheapest reliable energy (particularly electricity), regardless of whether fossil fuels are used, so as to improve their access to clean water, low pollution cooking facilities and good medical services.”

      Just how are the impoverished to pay for electricity at £0.06 per unit
      Just how are they to pay for the infrastructure to get the electricity to their hoses.
      How are the suppliers to stop theft of electricity
      What are the appliances the impoverished to use the electricity Cooker? Kettles? Fridges? Who is to buy this stuff for them? who is to pay for the units used.

      Most agree the best route to local supply of remote areas are batteries and solar cells for led bulbs/mobile/laptop charging
      ——————-
      • That they dissolve the IPCC and the UNFCCC.

      So you want to stop just the collation of research? or do you want to stop all research into the climate? Is it inconvenient to have yet more research showing that we are on a path to ecocide-hide the path!
      ————————-
      • That once respected academic institutions and scientific publications put their own houses in order and once again allow the free exchange of scientific ideas and results without prejudice.

      Are you suggesting that they spend publication time on iron sun, chem trails, zero point energy, flat earth, sky dragon stuff?

      Surely non science should be rejected.

      I would be very interested in seeing what physical properties of magnetism cause warming, what physical aspects of LOD causes warming, what physical evidence there is for non earth planetary motion causing warming. But I can see proof that GHGs can cause back radiation, and can change the temperature that radiation finally leaves the earth..

  2. Posted 2015/01/07 at 08:07 | Permalink | Reply

    Wait a minute, what am I apologising for? Your comment was made at 03.26hrs and approved at 07.55hrs. I have to sleep sometimes Ford!

  3. Posted 2015/01/09 at 07:23 | Permalink | Reply

    If you don’t approve and answer my comments at your website, do you expect me to continue approving and answering your comments at mine?

  4. thefordprefect
    Posted 2015/01/27 at 13:03 | Permalink | Reply

    Natural fractures can extend 1000metres upwards. simulated fractures 500metres. Fracking depth is between 2000m and 3000m
    this report suggests at least 600metres should exist between aquifers and fracking depth.

    https://www.dur.ac.uk/resources/refine/HydraulicFracturesRBfinal2.pdf

    So your graphic is also invalid since it should show fractures going up 1/3rd the distance to the aquifer.

    You also have to maintain the structure of the well – leakage would be disastrous – for the life of the aquifer

    Of course you have not mentioned disposal of fracking and produced fluids. Down another bore hole – I hope not!

  5. Posted 2015/02/08 at 13:42 | Permalink | Reply

    sea ice missing post

  6. thefordprefect
    Posted 2015/02/25 at 18:17 | Permalink | Reply

    thefordprefect says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    February 25, 2015 at 6:15 pm
    mmmm! sounds like a mild version of what Mann was subjected:

    15. The scope of this request is to reach any and all data, documents and things in your possession, including those stored or residing on any of the specified or referenced (see FN 1, supra) computers, hard drives, desktops, laptops, file servers, database servers, email servers or other systems where data was transmitted or stored on purpose or as a result of transient use of a system or application in the course of day to day research or product processing work that is owned or contracted for by you or any of your officers, managers, employees, agents, board members, academic departments, divisions, programs, IT department, contractors and other representatives.

    2. As used herein, the words “record”, “records”, “document” or “documents” mean the original and any copies of any written, printed, typed, electronic, or graphic matter of any kind or nature, however produced or reproduced, any book, pamphlet, brochure, periodical, newspaper, letter, correspondence, memoranda, notice, facsimile, e-mail, manual, press release, telegram, report, study, handwritten note, working paper, chart, paper, graph, index, tape, data sheet, data processing card, or any other written, recorded, transcribed, punched, taped, filmed or graphic matter now in your possession, custody or control.

    1. All documents that constitute or are in any way related to correspondence, messages or e-mails sent by Dr. Michael Mann to, or received from, any of the following persons: [39 names]+

    (nn) All research assistants, secretaries or administrative staff with whom Dr. Mann worked while he was at the University of Virginia.

  7. thefordprefect
    Posted 2016/01/09 at 01:34 | Permalink | Reply

    from posting 9/01/16

    Already posted this but seems to have gone to your bucket.

    tfp
    So you want the to give equal prominence to flat earthers, sky dragons, HARP, chemtrails, iron sun,?
    ———-
    [Reply] No, but I do expect them not to hide adverse data handed to them on a plate by a properly qualified scientist,
    ——————–
    tfp
    please name your scientist (only one?) and link their data handed to bbc.
    ————————————–
    because hiding adverse data, like Michael Mann did in the ‘hide the decline’ scandal, undermines the scientific method. and skews public debate and policymaking.
    ———————–
    tfp
    You cannot be serious trying to resurrect this untruth, can you?
    the mxd tree ring data loss of contact with global temps in the late 60s was already subject of a doc by briffa at the time the data was used. It was used as an illustration on a pamphlet – note illustration, pamphlet – not a scientific doc. The decline in the wood data was “hidden” by placing the real world direct temp measurement on the end. I.e. there was no real temp decline, the lack of tree ring data following this temperature is not hidden from scientists who want to know about it.
    ————————–

    Surely if the consensus of the majority of scientists is for AGW then this should be what is pushed. You cannot expect them to push all the alternatives equally without the scientific backing?

    [Reply] Science isn’t a democracy. By your argument, the bigwigs of the renaissance period would have held sway and we’d still be on a flat earth with the Sun revolving round us. And you don’t want to align yourself with flat earthers, do you?
    —————————–
    tfp
    so who is going to provide the filter to remove the dross. – you, me, one of 100s of climate scientists, doug cotton, or perhaps the cornwall alliance? etc

  8. Posted 2016/04/01 at 09:56 | Permalink | Reply

    thefordprefect says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    April 1, 2016 at 12:49 am

    Excess winter mortality (EWM) and average winter temperature

    Excess winter deaths (EWDs) in 2013/14 were the lowest on record and coincided with an increase in average winter temperature. However, the link between average winter temperature and EWDs is much less clear in some years. For example, winter 2009/10 was exceptionally cold, but excess winter mortality (EWM) was similar to years with mild winters.

    EWDs in 2013/14 were less than 40% of the EWDs in 1999/2000, which coincided with the last flu epidemic.

    A greater proportion of homes in England now have measures to improve energy efficiency such as cavity wall insulation, modern central heating and double-glazing compared with 2001. In 2012, approximately 66% of dwellings with cavity walls had insulation, up from 5.8 million in 2001.This means homes are becoming more energy efficient (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2014). There have been a number of schemes aimed at reducing fuel poverty (there is more information in Policy Context). With these home improvements, homes are easier to heat and keep warm which may have altered the relationship between the weather and winter mortality.

    from the data:

    Notice the change in rate since windmills were used – I cannot

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: