DC and DP just remember to keep the modelling in perspective. I am happy to believe in them accepting there will be a variability of plus or minus 20 or 30% from reality, like every other intelligent prediction we may make in life. My point is not to get too caught up in arguing about the accuracy of predictive models. I will go with the indisputable physics, if we keep pumping CO2 and methane into the atmosphere at ever increasing rates we get atmospheric heating. That is a given. I then note that for the last 360 months, NASA says that global temperatures have been at or above the 20th Century average. The last below average month was in 1985. We have a disturbing trend here. So yes we can challenge models but really I need to ask where do you stand on climate change?

Do you believe it is our greatest challenge that we must deal with now or are you both still, dare I say it, sitting on the fence and waiting for further data?

Earl Hood if you are willing to give 20 or 30% leeway you can't argue there was unprecedented warming.

The basic physics of the greenhouse effect can't be argued and I believe in. How it works in a chaotic system is not clear. It also seems that the effect of Carbon Dioxide is overstated and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to explain the reason of the plateau to me.

interesting bit of rationalisation there earl. your 20% or 30% variability being an "educated" guess i surmise.

yes, if you keep pumping c02 and methane into the atmosphere (and no other factors change) you would get atmospheric heating. but the assumption (in brackets) assumes a closed system and is not realistic. there is more at play as ms marple would say

quite happy to believe the globe is warming, just not sure where it is all heading and what if any is the most effective way for humans to combat it

i've always believed any solution (to either effecting it directly or coping with it) lies in new technologies, which might be more wishful than prudent, but i am optimistic,

i think a far bigger problem (and also begging a technology breakthrough) is our out of control and escalating world population.

such a pity that science is a much avoided discipline in our education institutions these days

maybe soylent green will be our salvation after all?

Why is it the skeptics always seem more open minded and practical?

Exactly. You have nailed it. There are so many variables it is disingenuous to focus on carbon dioxide.

Well rubbish Wrecker as I pointed out earlier CO2 is the problem, along with methane and other greenhouse gases. The physics is indistupable, if you keep pumping CO2 into a system you get warming, there has since been some debate here about whether it is a closed system. I say it is a closed system, DC says no but I would take issue with that. So yes there are many variables but that is no excuse to do nothing. We know you are obsessed with the accuracy of models, I say they are a side issue, the basic physics says we have a problem that must be addressed now not later.

This to me is the crux of the argument. I agree that there is continual refining and evolution of models.

To me it comes down to whether we believe that climate scientists continually make changes to flawed models to support their assertions or the models have validity but continue to be refined as more is learned and more ( and different) data comes to hand.

I keep pressing the same point. I have found the majority of reading I have done worrying. The consequences of inaction to me dictate that I don't think we can afford to be on the wrong side of the debate on this.

What the correct action is and levels of action required is entirely different debate which to me is even more troubling.

Nutbean you have done alot of reading on the subject and find it worrying. What alarming predictions have materialised since you have been doing your reading? I'll tell you what hasn't

• Rampant warming
• rampant sea level rises
• increased cyclone activity
• increased cyclone intensity
• polar bear numbers
• melting of arctic ice

Good point DP but I think we can continue to manage the nuclear issues we have had for nearly 70 years but yes it is always a risk. Food production and population movements will all become a greater problem as the temperature continues to rise. Millions will be on the move with sea level rises. How will we handle that?

You do realise the climate has not risen for almost 2 decades?

Well rubbish Wrecker as I pointed out earlier CO2 is the problem, along with methane and other greenhouse gases. The physics is indistupable, if you keep pumping CO2 into a system you get warming, there has since been some debate here about whether it is a closed system. I say it is a closed system, DC says no but I would take issue with that. So yes there are many variables but that is no excuse to do nothing. We know you are obsessed with the accuracy of models, I say they are a side issue, the basic physics says we have a problem that must be addressed now not later.

Hahaha. I agree with the physics but can't argue with the facts. The climate has not had any statistical increase in warming for 17 years. CO2 and methane have increased over this period. Can you agree we have some kind of lack of understanding here. I.e the science is not settled?

sorry guys, global climate change is not a closed system. it is affected by non global events (many not fully understood)

as an example even the simple greenhouse effect is not a closed system (note every thing above the light blue)

I notice this is missing one enormous force. James Brayshaw!

Exactly. You have nailed it. There are so many variables it is disingenuous to focus on carbon dioxide.

equally disingenuous to ignore it as a major factor which so many studies are identifying.

equally disingenuous to ignore it as a major factor which so many studies are identifying.

No that is the whole argument there are so many variables but carbon dioxide is the fixation on the studies despite historical data and the current hiatus proving it is not a driver of climate.

just to stir you guys up and be devil's advocate

lovely rita, meter maid

don't think she's impressed with the erstwhile mammalogist flannery turned climate guru nor with the 97% scientists claim

and.....don't shoot the messenger

Past frozen diseases now that is funny. Lets vaccinate everyone now with mercury that will solve it.

Lol mercury

what is funny about frozen viruses? you don't think a virus can come out of dormancy, just like a seed can? to believe there can be no frozen nasty's in the deep permafrost, is being like ozzy ostrich.

Cant sign this partition sorry dee-luded. Don't know what that [censored] Abbott is up too and who gives a [censored] about Obama. The last thing this climate change noise is all about is saving people or the environment. Its about global de population. Check out www.cecaust.com.au

Its an interesting read.

Go Dees

climate change noise is pollution

those of us who are concerned about the climate change Re CO2, & other pollutants in the atmosphere, aren't on about world population. however it seems like its unsustainable at the present scale of things; with the way so few of us all are managing to do so much damage to the Earth.

No that is the whole argument there are so many variables but carbon dioxide is the fixation on the studies despite historical data and the current hiatus proving it is not a driver of climate.

Carbon Dioxide has emerged as the most readily identified and I think from an economist view manageable factor.

Don't think the hiatus has yet been proven as the result of any driver.

At least you have not resorted to the simplistic it's all just a part of normal cycles.

And no I don't want to return to an argument of what is normal.

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/siberia-mystery-craters-methane-climate-change

http://beforeitsnews.com/environment/2014/08/the-really-scary-thing-about-those-jaw-dropping-siberian-craters-2506394.html

http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/more-siberian-methane-blowholes-found-in-permafrost/story-fnjwvztl-1227236656999

I was just reading an article from the New Yorker that is about the Cascadia fault line in North East US... but there was one paragraph that I thought summed up pretty well the attitude of the deniers:

"On the face of it, earthquakes seem to present us with problems of space: the way we live along fault lines, in brick buildings, in homes made valuable by their proximity to the sea. But, covertly, they also present us with problems of time. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, but we are a young species, relatively speaking, with an average individual allotment of three score years and ten. The brevity of our lives breeds a kind of temporal parochialism—an ignorance of or an indifference to those planetary gears which turn more slowly than our own."

I recommend the article regardless, as a very good (if frightening) read:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

I was just reading an article from the New Yorker that is about the Cascadia fault line in North East US... but there was one paragraph that I thought summed up pretty well the attitude of the deniers:

"On the face of it, earthquakes seem to present us with problems of space: the way we live along fault lines, in brick buildings, in homes made valuable by their proximity to the sea. But, covertly, they also present us with problems of time. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, but we are a young species, relatively speaking, with an average individual allotment of three score years and ten. The brevity of our lives breeds a kind of temporal parochialism—an ignorance of or an indifference to those planetary gears which turn more slowly than our own."

I recommend the article regardless, as a very good (if frightening) read:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one

I tend to think that the church is to blame for a lot of this attitude. whats mine is mine, gets your hands off my stack.

I prefer the other more indigenous perspective of things, the EARTH own us. we are inhabiting its surface, & we should be picking the fleas & other irritants from it, to keep it healthy & happy...

I tend to think that the church is to blame for a lot of this attitude. whats mine is mine, gets your hands off my stack.

I prefer the other more indigenous perspective of things, the EARTH own us. we are inhabiting its surface, & we should be picking the fleas & other irritants from it, to keep it healthy & happy...

the earth worshippers

aka "loverly filth down 'ere"

Deadly Typhoon Soudelor batters Taiwan http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33832483 written in English time....

Powerful Typhoon Soudelor is battering Taiwan with strong winds and heavy rain, leaving at least four people dead.

The storm - with winds of more than 230km/h (142mph) - made landfall on the eastern coast early on Saturday, and is now moving across the island.

It is ripping up trees and tearing down billboards, and triggered a landslide in at least one village. About two million households have been left without electricity. Rail services and flights have been cancelled and all schools and offices closed.

The Jingmei River is threatening to flood parts of the capital Taipei

Taiwan's weather bureau says the typhoon is moving north-west, gradually losing its strength.

Among the victims were an eight-year-old girl and her mother who were swept out to sea.

"I've never seen such a powerful typhoon in my 60 years," one resident in the eastern Taitung county told Taiwan's Formosa TV. Ahead of Soudelour's arrival, the authorities evacuated thousands of people from their homes.

The storm is later expected to move into the Taiwan Strait and on to mainland China.

the earth worshippers

aka "loverly filth down 'ere"

Fabulous, just fabulous.

"Some woman lolling about in a pond, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government" - actually after seeing the convoluted process of electing Senators and the quality of Senators we got, I am not so certain that I don't prefer Arthur's method.

Something new for dee-luded to mull over

seems the more we learn the less we know

Something new for dee-luded to mull over

seems the more we learn the less we know

actually dc, the more we discover, the more we learn, the more we then know. the ebb & flow of knowledge is continuous, dc.

tell that to that to your Northern mate Dr Turf, who fly's off at the bit, without any understanding of the under-lyeing matters, which cause disruptions.

....................

so we should all hold our breath; if the climate change's for the worse, causing death & destruction with increasing force & regularity.

lets just sit on our hands & do nothing to reverse hurting issues.

let the game get worse,

let violence get worse

let religious/idealistic radicalism get worse before we act

lets continue with this stressful competative model of economy continue even with its destruction of people & of family's Via drugs, violence, suicide, etc etc

lets all just turn a 'blind eye', because the economy suits some suited types within the communities; at the expence of more spiritualist types who cannot place any value on economics & wealth.

life isn't about money & its not a game like monopoly.

its not about winning, its about sharing, good spirited natures, & communal teamwork.. this is why we are warm blooded with males & females. ∧ we are a herd type species

so lets stop all this talk of blame, or of origins, as the truth is we need to adapt, & to change, to maintain our environment to stay hospitable to our life & our ability to exiast healthily & to grow our foods etc.

if others are getting flooded by rising seas, by storm flooding, by vicious weather systems, by droughts, or by pestilence, w ll need to do something in the value of warmblooded-ness.

the facts are sea levels are rising, perma frosts are melting, atmosphere temperatures are getting hotter, seas are getting more acidic, and is the air as we've known for over a century, thru acid rain.

Agree with you Dee-Luded as I'm sure anyone with a basic training in science and an associated concept of cause-and-effect will also.

But the current share price of Blackmores should serve as a sobering reminder that a significant proportion have disengaged the logical reasoning circuit.

All I really care about is that my coal mine shares yield above 5.5% and I'll be happy to let my grandchildren deal with the fallout.

The climate has not had any statistical increase in warming for 17 years. CO2 and methane have increased over this period.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34763036

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34763036

You can't be serious? That swiss cheese article has so many holes I sometimes can't even understand what it is talking about. What is your contention?