cobran20

Debunking The Man-Made Global Warming Myth Consensus

1329 posts in this topic

Looks like this Professor's tenure is about to be terminated early!

Dr Geoff Duffy: Methane stance way off track

Quote

...Global cloud cover has been studied for many years, but the IPCC's latest report (AR5, 2013), admits it doesn't know whether it is expanding or shrinking, which means it can't say what warming - if any - our emissions might cause...

...Gaps in these areas of knowledge caused all 102 CMIP-5 climate models relied on by the IPCC to fail to predict recent global temperatures, which have been essentially constant for two decades, despite carbon dioxide rising 9 per cent in that time....

WHY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ANY of the NON-CONDENSABLE GREENHOUSE GASES TO HAVE AN APPRECIABLE AFFECT on WEATHER and CLIMATE CHANGE

Quote

...It is scientifically inaccurate and dishonest to isolate “radiation - low concentration/noncondensable greenhouse GASES” without fully endorsing: {direct radiation - LIQUID water
interactions), {direct radiation – SOLID matter exchanges}, {radiation - water vapour
excitations}, as well as all the other thermal and non-thermal humidity driving forces in winds,
thermals, gales, rain, storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, Trade Winds, Jet streams, El Nino’s, La
Nina’s, atmospheric pollution and incomplete combustion particulates. All are significant! The
impacting effects of ocean currents, ocean conveyors, cloud dynamics and sun spot activity.
No wonder that simplified mathematical models fail to predict climate change.
Geoff Duffy July 2019
Professor Emeritus Chemical Engineering
geoffduffy@lycos.com

Is the Dept of Settled Science already writing his obituary due to accidental ingestion of polonium?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cobran20 said:

Looks like this Professor's tenure is about to be terminated early!

Dr Geoff Duffy: Methane stance way off track

WHY IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR ANY of the NON-CONDENSABLE GREENHOUSE GASES TO HAVE AN APPRECIABLE AFFECT on WEATHER and CLIMATE CHANGE

Is the Dept of Settled Science already writing his obituary due to accidental ingestion of polonium?

I agree - Duffy should definitely lose his tenure. Knows nothing about climate science and just keeps putting out ill-informed false information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, staringclown said:

I agree - Duffy should definitely lose his tenure. Knows nothing about climate science and just keeps putting out ill-informed false information.

You've got his contact details there. Feel free to contact him and explain why he is so wrong. Please keep us informed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NASA - Solar Activity Forecast for Next Decade Favorable for Exploration

Quote

...The forecast for the next solar cycle says it will be the weakest of the last 200 years. The maximum of this next cycle – measured in terms of sunspot number, a standard measure of solar activity level – could be 30 to 50% lower than the most recent one. The results show that the next cycle will start in 2020 and reach its maximum in 2025....

looks like more of that rare white powdery stuff will appear in buttf@ck places around the globe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 20/07/2019 at 2:42 PM, cobran20 said:

You've got his contact details there. Feel free to contact him and explain why he is so wrong. Please keep us informed.

Or I could ask the bloke across the street for his opinion. It would be equally valid.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Paris saw a record high temperature of 42.6C (108.7F) on Thursday, amid a heatwave that broke records across Western Europe.

A red alert was issued in north France. Germany also set a new national temperature record of 41.5C, passing the figure set just a day before.

The UK recorded a record temperature for July of 38.1C, with trains told to run more slowly to stop rails buckling.

The Netherlands also recorded its highest ever temperature at 40.7C.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49108847

 

Irrefutable proof of climate change - Cobran style

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zaph said:

 

Irrefutable proof of climate change - Cobran style

Cobran is running in ever decreasing circles... Eventually he'll run into himself and fall over. How we'll laugh! ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Warming unlike anything in 2000 years: study

Quote

Earth's rapid warming in the late 20th century was far more widespread than any temperature variations during the previous 2000 years, according to a study that shows how profoundly humans have altered the climate.

The study crunched data covering two millennia from almost 700 sources ranging from tree rings and coral to sediments and ice cores.

 

Published in the journal Nature, it found previous major climate events were confined to certain areas and not global phenomena as scientists had previously assumed, said one of its co-authors, Columbia University climate scientist Nathan Steiger.

"The main takeaway is that climate variability in the contemporary period is very different than what's happened in the past 2000 years," he said.

Some people who question whether burning coal, oil and gas is causing global warming point to evidence of prolonged shifts in climatic conditions in past centuries to argue that today's higher temperatures may also be a natural phenomenon.

Previous shifts include the "Medieval Climate Anomaly" from AD800 to AD1200 when temperatures rose, and the "Little Ice Age" from the 1300s to the 1850s when Britons skated on the frozen River Thames.

But the study, which measured readings from zero to AD2000, showed that some of the coldest temperatures during that period were more localised, occurring in parts of the Pacific in the 15th century and in northwestern Europe and southeastern North America in the 17th.

By contrast, the researchers found the rapid rise in average temperatures in the closing decades of the past century affected more than 98 per cent of the planet.

"This is definitely further evidence that fossil fuels and anthropogenic activity actually has fundamentally changed the climate," Steiger told Reuters.

Professor of climatology Mark Maslin, at University College London, said the paper should "finally stop climate change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is part of a natural ...cycle".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, staringclown said:

Cobran is running in ever decreasing circles... Eventually he'll run into himself and fall over. How we'll laugh! ^_^

There's only one poster on this site, two if you count Tor in a drunken stupor, that I think would run into himself and it's not Cobran. I just don't understand his anti science zeal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 7:31 PM, staringclown said:

Was that using raw or homogenised data? I'm still awaiting explanation why we're get records in that 'ever disappearing' snow and cold temperatures as well, never mind that the Maldives haven't sunk.

But one of the dissidents has a forecast about the extremes which I already posted here.

Looking forward to the overall crop yields for this year! We'll see the effects of the 'F' word and that will not be consistent with globull warming theory.

In the meantime, have a look at yet another classic prediction from the Dept of Settled Science & Associates. Refer page 7 in the WSJ Article (copy attached):

Quote

February 2, 1978

Low-Lying Lands Could Be Submerged By Climatic Disaster

A   climatic   disaster,   triggered  by  the  continued  burning  of  oil  and  coal,  could  result in  the  submergence  of  much  of Florida,  Holland    and    other low-lying  areas  in  the  next  50 years,  an  Ohio  State  University scientist  predicted.

I'll be heading that way next year. I'll let you know if I need a raft to get around. But so far, that forecast is dead wrong!

WSJ130Final.pdf

Edited by cobran20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 8:02 PM, zaph said:

There's only one poster on this site, two if you count Tor in a drunken stupor, that I think would run into himself and it's not Cobran. I just don't understand his anti science zeal. 

Mr Snowflake having a cluster melt again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cobran20 said:

Was that using raw or homogenised data? I'm still awaiting explanation why we're get records in that 'ever disappearing' snow and cold temperatures as well, never mind that the Maldives haven't sunk.

But one of the dissidents has a forecast about the extremes which I already posted here.

Looking forward to the overall crop yields for this year! We'll see the effects of the 'F' word and that will not be consistent with globull warming theory.

In the meantime, have a look at yet another classic prediction from the Dept of Settled Science & Associates. Refer page 7 in the WSJ Article (copy attached):

I'll be heading that way next year. I'll let you know if I need a raft to get around. But so far, that forecast is dead wrong!

WSJ130Final.pdf

They use the same data that you use when you talk about the medieval warm and the little ice age.

Florida sea level rise costing 4 billion

While you're in the Netherlands be sure to take a look at the very impressive and expensive engineering works the dutch have had to build since 1978 to prevent the country being submerged.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, staringclown said:

They use the same data that you use when you talk about the medieval warm and the little ice age.

Florida sea level rise costing 4 billion

While you're in the Netherlands be sure to take a look at the very impressive and expensive engineering works the dutch have had to build since 1978 to prevent the country being submerged.

 

There is a difference between prevention and actually happening. Have the levels risen at Fort Denison in any way over the last 100 years?

as to the rest:

Quote

...While it’s incredible that Paris exceeded their record high on Thursday, it’s important that we look not only at trends but also give a bit of perspective.

No one should make a preconceived assumption based on one daily temperature measurement.

You have to first look at whether or not a record temperature occurred in an urban area, then see what the upper air pattern is doing, and lastly look at trends and previous years with similar atmospheric conditions.

Skeptics who use cold and snow as evidence that global warming is a hoax are always reminded by climate activists that weather and climate are vastly different—and they’d be correct.

So, why do activists blame a single record-high temperature, let alone a summer heatwave, on climate change? That I can’t answer. It seems to me that it’s “do as I say, not as I do.”

The bottom line is this: heatwaves happen, it’s summer and it’s hot.

BTW, have you contacted the NZ Professor yet to tell him he is wrong?

Edited by cobran20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cobran20 said:

There is a difference between prevention and actually happening. Have the levels risen at Fort Denison in any way over the last 100 years?

as to the rest:

BTW, have you contacted the NZ Professor yet to tell him he is wrong?

No sh*t Sherlock. If something is prevented by definition it doesn't actually happen. Your replies are growing increasingly bizarre. Are you claiming the the billions spent by the Dutch weren't necessary?

Severe Coastal Flooding in Florida Is Getting Worse, New Study Finds

So now you don't even require your sources dismissing climate change to have finished high school.

Quote

I’m currently a junior in high school, and I plan on going to college to major in meteorology. My goal is to obtain a Master’s of Science (M.S.) degree, though I may go for a Ph.D. in the future.

At least your NZ professor has a qualification. Albeit in fibre rather than climate science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, staringclown said:

No sh*t Sherlock. If something is prevented by definition it doesn't actually happen. Your replies are growing increasingly bizarre. Are you claiming the the billions spent by the Dutch weren't necessary?

Severe Coastal Flooding in Florida Is Getting Worse, New Study Finds

So now you don't even require your sources dismissing climate change to have finished high school.

At least your NZ professor has a qualification. Albeit in fibre rather than climate science.

The Netherlands have always been a low land country. A lot of their land has been reclaimed from the sea, started before globull warming was even mentioned. They don't have dykes for nothing.

So how are those doomsday globull warming predictions coming along? Here is a video with some nice historical perspective on those current hot temps in the northern hemisphere. I'm surprised the Dept of Settled Science has not homogenised the digitised old newspapers available on the web.

 

Edited by cobran20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, staringclown said:

At least your NZ professor has a qualification. Albeit in fibre rather than climate science.

What about Jennifer Marohasy? She is qualified and published peer-reviewed climate science journals. Perhaps you can argue with her that the BOM has not homogenised the data, including the hottest day. Do let us know!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, cobran20 said:

The Netherlands have always been a low land country. A lot of their land has been reclaimed from the sea, started before globull warming was even mentioned. They don't have dykes for nothing.

So how are those doomsday globull warming predictions coming along? Here is a video with some nice historical perspective on those current hot temps in the northern hemisphere. I'm surprised the Dept of Settled Science has not homogenised the digitised old newspapers available on the web.

 

Your bait and switch is growing tiresome. You post some sh*t about Fort Denison when no-one has claimed that Fort Denison is at threat of inundation. YOU posted that the Netherlands and Florida were predicted to be submerged and then ignore all evidence that flooding has been increasing and that if not for preventative measures that's exactly what would be happening.

Then you post the blog of a high school student to support your nonsense in regard to all time records being broken. You're a f*cking joke!

You keep sh*tting on about "homogenised" data. You don't have a clue what it even means. You use NOAA data which you also have been shown to not understand to support yours claims. Oh sorry, it is only valid when it shows cooling?

What about Jennifer Marohasy? Is she a climate scientist? No, she's a biologist. The pay for publish "Journal" in which she was published has been shut down. Probably due to the fake reviews it accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, cobran20 said:

Mr Snowflake having a cluster melt again?

You are either poorly educated, a nut job or both. 

Please tell me you haven't bred? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, staringclown said:

 

Your bait and switch is growing tiresome. You post some sh*t about Fort Denison when no-one has claimed that Fort Denison is at threat of inundation. YOU posted that the Netherlands and Florida were predicted to be submerged and then ignore all evidence that flooding has been increasing and that if not for preventative measures that's exactly what would be happening.

Then you post the blog of a high school student to support your nonsense in regard to all time records being broken. You're a f*cking joke!

You keep sh*tting on about "homogenised" data. You don't have a clue what it even means. You use NOAA data which you also have been shown to not understand to support yours claims. Oh sorry, it is only valid when it shows cooling?

What about Jennifer Marohasy? Is she a climate scientist? No, she's a biologist. The pay for publish "Journal" in which she was published has been shut down. Probably due to the fake reviews it accepted.

The bottom line is that all the d&g globull warming predictions are proving false. Live with it!

Once again, if a pharma company homogenised its trial data to make it fit its expectations, it would be sued.

If industry built manufacturing plants based on the level of accuracy of the science of globull warming, it would go bankrupt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, zaph said:

You are either poorly educated, a nut job or both. 

Please tell me you haven't bred? 

Were you staring in front of the mirror when you came up with that thought? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cobran20 said:

The bottom line is that all the d&g globull warming predictions are proving false. Live with it!

Once again, if a pharma company homogenised its trial data to make it fit its expectations, it would be sued.

If industry built manufacturing plants based on the level of accuracy of the science of globull warming, it would go bankrupt. 

That's rich coming from you who've provided absolutely no proof of anything. You rely on google alerts to post any headline around the world that had some cold weather. You don't even read the articles. That's why you post a school kids blog and call it proof. 

Here's the homogenised data versus the actual data - massive difference eh?

 
temperature-trends.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.