Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

CC3 -- Why I believe that a third option is needed for climate change

1…888990919294»

Comments

  • #2792
    Gaoth Laidir
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Proof positive as to why so many records are being broken in recent years, more weather stations in previously unmonitored areas. Many of these being in areas that are more likely to experience extreme weather.

    Meanwhile there are still huge areas of the planet that are completely unmonitored and their weather is calculated from the average of two or more weather stations 100s to 1000s of km away. Many of the places that are furtherest away from human activity are the least monitored, but have their weather calculated from places close to human activity.

    Well case in point is the time machine posted yesterday. The places with the least coverage are some of the places showing the highest anomalies now. But you're not supposed to highlight that at all, it seems.


  • #2793
    Nabber
    Registered Users Posts: 2,855 ✭✭✭Nabber


    Also worth noting that satellite data is less accurate that ground stations, also that satellite data is a calculation of temps derived from computer modelling of Earths brightness. Don't know that that is communicated well.

    The assumption that the average temp of the globe (land and sea), was known from as early as 1880 at every point in time within a .01 of a degree. To me at least that's how it's portrayed. Where the data does not corroborate the warming trend the data is adjusted. Some isolated stations also fell foul of island heating :pac::pac: Must have be adjusted because they had 'island' in the name :cool::cool:

    That's a tough starting point to get on board with any theory.


  • #2794
    Danno
    Registered Users Posts: 8,913 ✭✭✭Danno


    Danno wrote: »
    Before you do though - why did you drop Asia from your evaluation of my comments regarding sterilisation? (not with a z-ed). What card comes next I do wonder? :confused:
    Banana Republic 1 wrote: »
    Are moderators aloud to be racists now ?

    Well that didn't take long. Now, I'm gonna ask you to show me where exactly I said people need to be sterilised based upon their skin-colour or kindly withdraw that statement. Levelling accusations of racism against me is a charge I don't take lightly.
    Nabber wrote: »
    The assumption that the average temp of the globe (land and sea), was known from as early as 1880 at every point in time within a .01 of a degree.

    What amazes me is how the Climate Alarmists are so sure about their models showing 1880 temperatures as gospel. Yet, in Ireland the 33.3c recorded in Kilkenny during 1887 has been cast in doubt: https://twitter.com/cmurphy2904/status/1154547439971577862?s=20
    Likewise in Australia, the previous record high temperature in 1909 was "scrubbed" from the record books. https://jennifermarohasy.com/2020/07/hottest-day-ever-in-australia-confirmed-bourke-51-7c-3rd-january-1909/
    Why?

    Either the records are accurate or they're not. If they're not, then these world average temperature fancy maps of 1880 are worthless and thus undermines the whole warming planet theory.


  • #2795
    Nabber
    Registered Users Posts: 2,855 ✭✭✭Nabber


    Danno wrote: »

    Either the records are accurate or they're not. If they're not, then these world average temperature fancy maps of 1880 are worthless and thus undermines the whole warming planet theory.

    Satellite data is also subject to adjustment. Where data doesn’t match adjustments are made based on orbital decay and various other parameters.

    Not to say that is wrong, but is should be clearly indicated imagine if they led with “after adjusting the data we can clearly see a warming trend”.


  • #2796
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,795 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Danno wrote:
    Ah, this nugget - the over-population issue. Lets sterilise Africa and most parts of Asia, yeah? That's where they're popping out babbies to bate the band. Start there, okay? Agree?

    Growing wealth inequality is probably playing a critical role here, and I'd have to agree, this is a racist slur


  • Advertisement
  • #2797
    pistolpetes11
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 7,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭pistolpetes11


    MOD NOTE :

    Just went through a few pages of , I don't even know what to call it at this stage and Im going to close this thread for a few days to let people calm down , this conversation may need posts to be approved going forward if folks can't stay civil , Ive no skin in the discussion either way but the behaviour in here falls well short of the standards of this forum


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement