24 days to Al Gore’s ’10 years to save the planet’ and ‘point of no return’

a reply to: Phage

That helps - thank you

I have a lot of questions - but I'm going to spare you all that. Most of them are the kinds of things you'd ask if you're nearly hysterical. Anyway, they'd be mostly off topic in a thread that's trying to prove that AL Gore is an idiot - or a liar

:-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis
No need for hysterics. But concern is certainly called for.

a reply to: Phage

That made my night

There are people that know me very well (and how my mind runs) that will want to thank you too

:-)

a reply to: Phage

Phage

you are baiting me and I refuse to fall for it. You know what global temperatures were like from the 1940s to the 1970s. This point has already been proven to you many many times with scientists writing letters to the president about it.

But I do notice that you have turned the debate away from the theory of climate change caused by ocean oscillations.

Judith Curry is a climatologist and here is her testimony

judithcurry.com...

Phage - you may not agree with it but you do have to admit that the theory is out there and it certainly tracks the last 120 years better than the theory of Co2 emissions.

www.atmos.washington.edu...

Tired of Control Freaks

I thought the thread was about what WUWT claimed Al gore said and what Al Gore actually said.


Has that bee settled already?

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

This point has already been proven to you many many times with scientists writing letters to the president about it.

False. It has not been proven to me and writing letters to the President proves nothing.

But I do notice that you have turned the debate away from the theory of climate change caused by ocean oscillations.

I notice that you have turned the debate away from Anthony Watts' strawman argument. Which is the actual topic.

Judith Curry is a climatologist and here is her testimony

I am familiar with her opinions.

you may not agree with it but you do have to admit that the theory is out there and it certainly tracks the last 120 years better than the theory of Co2 emissions.

Which theory? Cooling or oscillations? Oscillations are that, higher, lower, higher. The overall trend over the past 100 years has been higher. Even Dr. Curry says so in the source you linked:

No one questions that surface temperatures have increased overall since 1880

a reply to: Grimpachi

Depends on your point of view.

If you parse the words in a sentence and compare them word for word - Watts is wrong

if you consider the sentiment - that we have 10 years or so before several tipping points and irreversible damage occurs - that Watts is right.

Either way - Gore is a twat who delights in scaring little children for fun and profit.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: Phage

I posted a study showing that PDO tracks with global temperature changes for the last 120 years.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: Phage

Saying that you are familiar with Judith Currie's opinions tells me NOTHING - which is how you usually respond to anything.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The meanings are completely different so I would say Watts is wrong.

Also, it doesn't qualify as paraphrasing. Watts said something just as long as Gore did. Nothing was paraphrased it was changed.

That seems pretty dishonest IMO.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Saying that you are familiar with Judith Currie's opinions tells me NOTHING - which is how you usually respond to anything.

If you were paying attention to my stated position it would be clear that me saying that I am familiar with her opinions means I do not give them much credit.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks









*Drops microphone and walks off stage*

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I posted a study showing that PDO tracks with global temperature changes for the last 120 years.

Yes. I know what you posted. Apparently you don't. You have posted graphs of PDO indices, not global temperature changes.

PDO indices based upon projections of observed North Pacific sst and slp patterns onto those shown in Figure 1. Index values are normalized for October to March averages. Solid red lines depict 5-year running average values for each index, respectively.

a reply to: Phage

And again you say NOTHING !

WHY don't you agree with her opinions?

Tired of Control Freaks

erm; you do realize austraila is doomed not because of global warming but because it is high-tailing it in the direction of india. It has moved out of oceanic and atmospheric currents that allowed for rain and cooler temps in the past. it is gonna get crispy and GW or AGW has nothing to do with it.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks
What difference would it make to you if I detailed why? From past experience it would be a waste of effort.

Why do you agree with her, if you do?

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
erm; you do realize austraila is doomed not because of global warming but because it is high-tailing it in the direction of india. It has moved out of oceanic and atmospheric currents that allowed for rain and cooler temps in the past. it is gonna get crispy and GW or AGW has nothing to do with it.

Yes, this is true,

But you have trends and then you have anomalies. Australia has suffered a number of anomalous years lately.

We just had the warmest December day erm edit that, month since records began in 2015 for instance. This is NOT the slow desertificaton of Australia, this is something else.

Adelaide is entering its fourth hot spell for the month which will ensure this December is the hottest in 129 years of records.

The average temperature will come in above 25 degrees (combining nights and days), more than three-and-a-half degrees warmer than the long-term norm. This is a half-a-degree hotter than the previous December record, set in 1897. This December is even about two degrees hotter than the average January and February, typically the hottest summer months.

www.weatherzone.com.au...

a reply to: Phage

The earth is in fact warming, to what extent we are impacting that warming is yet to be determined. However if there is a chance we are significantly impacting it or impacting even at all and of course study's show this already;then the most prudent thing is to limit said impact as much as we can.

Phage there's not point in arguing this,or politicizing this, all of this is factual and if people do not agree well they are acting like igmos. Save your breath

a reply to: Phage

Just for you Phage

Read page 180

www.academia.edu...

By the way - Judith Curry did not make up this theory. There were other scientists involved from many disciplines.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I can't seem to get access. I have neither a Facebook nor Google account. Maybe you can tell me about it, even though it is entirely off topic.