Comments on: The Daily Pravda spin Moscow’s line

By: This is how the world ends…not with a warming, but by rewriting history « The Right of the People

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:08:49 +0000

[...] The Daily Pravda spin Moscow’s line (leftfootforward.org) [...]

By: SOCIALIST UNITY » ROUND THE BLOGS

SOCIALIST UNITY » ROUND THE BLOGS — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:00:39 +0000

[...] is “natural”. Praise also to the New Scientist, who published a point-by-point rebuttal of the Daily Express front page which listed “100 LIES REASONS WHY GLOBAL WARMING IS [...]

By: Look Left – The Week in Fast Forward | Left Foot Forward

Look Left – The Week in Fast Forward | Left Foot Forward — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:24:28 +0000

[...] is “natural”. Praise also to the New Scientist, who published a point-by-point rebuttal of the Daily Express front page which listed “100 LIES REASONS WHY GLOBAL WARMING IS [...]

By: george

george — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:02:18 +0000

anon

i’m working from the 1500 dataset released by met office last week. looks ok to me. the rise is obvious (though i haven’t corrected for weather station distributions) well before 2003. my graph is a little different from theirs probably due to this but I’m convinced anyway. the other advantage is i can construct the CRU curve equivalent form this dataset in about 100 lines of code, so no chance of ‘hiding’ anything, assuming the weather station data they released is ok.

i’m happy to move on from this, but i have big issues with the predictions, especially from the circulation models which have BIG error bars.

By: Shamik Das

Shamik Das — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:24:06 +0000

Tom, looks like the deniers are running scared: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/dec/14/climate-change-sceptic-ian-plimer And this guy’s meant to be their leader!

By: Anon E Mouse

Anon E Mouse — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:57:37 +0000

george – The method of taking the temperature changed in 2003, which set of results are you working from?

By: george

george — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:01:24 +0000

lets face it, the earth is warming, the weather stations shows the unequivocally

the question is, how much is due to humans and how much would have happened without the CO2 rise (or would the temperature have gone down and the CO2 effect is worse than thought?)

this then leads to the question of hjow much temp rise we can expect in future

these questions are as yet unanswered. the evidence and the models are just not sufficient as yet – FACT

my solution would be to stop arguing about it and have a carbon tax based on the last year’s overall temperature as given by weather stations. if the earth is going to heat up a lot – fine, the C tax will address that. if it doesn’t, everyone’s happy.

By: Billy Blofeld

Billy Blofeld — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:25:48 +0000

Shamik,

Nope. Just pointing out that it is valid to question the accepted orthodoxy using evidence. That is what this blog is for isn’t it?

By: Shamik Das

Shamik Das — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:47:37 +0000

Let me get this right, you’re claiming Galileo would have agreed with you had he been around today?!

By: Billy Blofeld

Billy Blofeld — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:41:46 +0000

Tom, I couldn't be arsed to try and type a reply in the 1 inch viewing window available on this blog, so I lavished you with a response on my own blog.