Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
more accurate.
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
more accurate.
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Only of a couple of cranks. They are about as credible as Piers Corbin -
who is a raving lunatic anti-vaxxer anti-AGW anti-science nutter. He is
the crazy brother of another nutter who used to lead the Labour party.
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
...Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be
more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Only of a couple of cranks. They are about as credible as Piers Corbin -
who is a raving lunatic anti-vaxxer anti-AGW anti-science nutter. He is
the crazy brother of another nutter who used to lead the Labour party.
There are satellites in orbit since 1970's monitoring the suns output
you cannot just hand wave away global warming by claiming "its the sun".
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html
There is a tiny component of variation with the suns solar cycle at
about 0.15% but it pales into insignificance compared to the 3% annual variation solar intensity caused by our 0.0167 orbital eccentricity.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 14:19:13 -0000 (UTC)caused-global-warming-gets-retracted/
Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:35:59 +0000, Spike wrote:Make sure you save some room for dessert.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
Do we have enough popcorn for this?
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/paper-that-claimed-the-sun-
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:35:59 +0000, Spike wrote:
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
Do we have enough popcorn for this?
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 18:48:56 +0100, Bernie wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 14:19:13 -0000 (UTC)
Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:35:59 +0000, Spike wrote:
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
Do we have enough popcorn for this?
Make sure you save some room for dessert.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/paper-that-claimed-the-sun-caused-global-warming-gets-retracted/
From March:
"We have published a preprint with the confirmation using the real
ephemeris of daily Earth-Sun distances that our results reported in paper Zharkova et al, 2019 are correct. The variations of the Sun-Earth
distances up to 0.016 au hinted in the paper were confirmed by the S-E distance ephemeris.
Therefore, the paper Zharkova et al, 2019 has been retracted without any grounds!"
I'm hoping for post-supper brandy and cigars too.
On 28/09/2021 18:01, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 18:48:56 +0100, Bernie wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 14:19:13 -0000 (UTC)
Brian Morrison <bdm@fenrir.org.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:35:59 +0000, Spike wrote:
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
Do we have enough popcorn for this?
Make sure you save some room for dessert.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/03/paper-that-claimed-the-sun-caused-global-warming-gets-retracted/
From March:
"We have published a preprint with the confirmation using the real ephemeris of daily Earth-Sun distances that our results reported in
paper Zharkova et al, 2019 are correct. The variations of the
Sun-Earth distances up to 0.016 au hinted in the paper were
confirmed by the S-E distance ephemeris.
Therefore, the paper Zharkova et al, 2019 has been retracted
without any grounds!"
I'm hoping for post-supper brandy and cigars too.
No need.
Look at the question that was posed, to which reference to this paper
was an accurate answer.
QED...
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some years
ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those based on
the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2 hypothesis deny it
On 28/09/2021 10:47, nightjar wrote:
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to
Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some years
ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those based
on the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2 hypothesis deny it
So yo do mean Mashnich and Bashkirtsev then? If you don't mean them,
then who exactly do you mean?
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:35:59 +0000, Spike wrote:
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
Do we have enough popcorn for this?
On 27/09/2021 08:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be
more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
On 29/09/2021 10:07, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 09:54, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 28/09/2021 10:47, nightjar wrote:
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to
Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on >>>>>>>> Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
to be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some
years ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those
based on the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2
hypothesis deny it
So yo do mean Mashnich and Bashkirtsev then? If you don't mean them,
then who exactly do you mean?
I have only seen reference to it being the view of the Academy. I have
no idea which individuals might be involved.
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
On 29/09/2021 09:54, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 28/09/2021 10:47, nightjar wrote:
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to
Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on >>>>>>> Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
to be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some years
ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those based
on the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2 hypothesis
deny it
So yo do mean Mashnich and Bashkirtsev then? If you don't mean them,
then who exactly do you mean?
I have only seen reference to it being the view of the Academy. I have
no idea which individuals might be involved.
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is the
cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis that a
number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual percentages to the number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct.
On 29/09/2021 13:09, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is the
cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis that a
number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual percentages to the
number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct.
Well, if you don't know what you're on about, forget it. Just don't talk bollocks.
On 27/09/2021 09:18, Martin Brown wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Only of a couple of cranks. They are about as credible as Piers Corbin
- who is a raving lunatic anti-vaxxer anti-AGW anti-science nutter. He
is the crazy brother of another nutter who used to lead the Labour party.
There are satellites in orbit since 1970's monitoring the suns output
you cannot just hand wave away global warming by claiming "its the sun".
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html
There is a tiny component of variation with the suns solar cycle at
about 0.15% but it pales into insignificance compared to the 3% annual
variation solar intensity caused by our 0.0167 orbital eccentricity.
However, that is from NASA who are proponents of the CO2 hypothesis and
who amended a whole load of early 20th century temperature measurements
that didn't support it.
On 27/09/2021 08:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be
more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
Try this lady's paper:
https://solargsm.com/solar-activity/
On 29/09/2021 15:50, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 29/09/2021 13:09, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is
the cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis
that a number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual
percentages to the number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct.
Well, if you don't know what you're on about, forget it. Just don't
talk bollocks.
What I am on about is that the CO2 hypothesis is no more than that. It
is not, as it is usually presented, proven scientific fact. There is a correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures, but there are
plenty of correlations between demonstrably unrelated things:
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link that
can be supported by experimental data.
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow to >>>>> protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some years
ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those based on
the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2 hypothesis deny it
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link
that can be supported by experimental data.
What I am on about is that the CO2 hypothesis is no more than that. It
is not, as it is usually presented, proven scientific fact. There is a correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures,
On 28/09/2021 10:47, nightjar wrote:
On 27/09/2021 09:12, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to be >>>> more accurate.
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to Glasgow >>>>>> to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
Fascinating. Which Russian scientists in particular?
The Russian Academy of Sciences put forward the hypothesis some years
ago. Their predictions matched actual events better than those based on
the CO2 hypothesis. Of course, adherents of the CO2 hypothesis deny it
Milutin Milanković was Serbian,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milutin_Milankovic
and an academy with his name is in Croatia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_and_Scientific_Center_%22Milutin_Milankovic
and an academy with his name is in Croatia.
He came up with the idea in the 1920s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
It suits the adherents of the CO2 hypothesis well, as we should now be entering an ice age, yet the scientific community generally claim the
Earth's temperature is increasing.
The only deniers are those with their head firmly planted in the sand.
On 29/09/2021 17:22, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 15:50, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 29/09/2021 13:09, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:Well, if you don't know what you're on about, forget it. Just don't
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is
the cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis
that a number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual
percentages to the number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct. >>>
talk bollocks.
What I am on about is that the CO2 hypothesis is no more than that. It
is not, as it is usually presented, proven scientific fact. There is a
correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures, but there are
plenty of correlations between demonstrably unrelated things:
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link that
can be supported by experimental data.
Perhaps you don't have children, it seems a feature of climate deniers.
I'd rather not take an unnecessary risk with our over-populated planet
and leave some natural resources for our children and their children.
YMMV
nightjar wrote
On 29/09/2021 15:50, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 29/09/2021 13:09, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternative
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is the >>>> cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis that a >>>> number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual percentages to the >>>> number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct.
Well, if you don't know what you're on about, forget it. Just don't talk >>> bollocks.
What I am on about is that the CO2 hypothesis is no more than that. It is
not, as it is usually presented, proven scientific fact. There is a
correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures, but there are
plenty of correlations between demonstrably unrelated things:
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link that can
be supported by experimental data.
Perhaps you don't have children, it seems a feature of climate deniers.
I'd rather not take an unnecessary risk with our over-populated planet and leave some natural resources for our children and their children.
YMMV
On Wed, 29 Sep 2021 17:22:25 +0100, nightjar wrote:
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link
that can be supported by experimental data.
You doubt that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?
On 28/09/2021 14:22, nightjar wrote:
On 27/09/2021 09:18, Martin Brown wrote:
On 27/09/2021 08:47, nightjar wrote:
On 26/09/2021 18:22, Sysadmin wrote:
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 17:39:36 +0100, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:That is certainly the opinion of Russian scientists, or sun spots to
Well feck all this climate change rubbish...I'm going up to
Glasgow to
protest about this conference with a big sign saying 'bring it on
Glasgow has never had such a nice warm extended summer'
Its the sun that causes it.
be more accurate.
Only of a couple of cranks. They are about as credible as Piers
Corbin - who is a raving lunatic anti-vaxxer anti-AGW anti-science
nutter. He is the crazy brother of another nutter who used to lead
the Labour party.
There are satellites in orbit since 1970's monitoring the suns output
you cannot just hand wave away global warming by claiming "its the sun". >>>
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/solar-events-news/Does-the-Solar-Cycle-Affect-Earths-Climate.html
There is a tiny component of variation with the suns solar cycle at
about 0.15% but it pales into insignificance compared to the 3%
annual variation solar intensity caused by our 0.0167 orbital
eccentricity.
However, that is from NASA who are proponents of the CO2 hypothesis
and who amended a whole load of early 20th century temperature
measurements that didn't support it.
Would you like to reference the source of your information?
On 29/09/2021 17:22, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 15:50, Chris Bacon wrote:
On 29/09/2021 13:09, nightjar wrote:
On 29/09/2021 12:15, Chris Bacon wrote:
"The view of the Academy"? Do you know what "The Russian Academy of
Sciences" is?
Do I care? I was merely pointing out that there is an alternativeWell, if you don't know what you're on about, forget it. Just don't
hypothesis. Nobody has actually managed to demonstrate that CO2 is
the cause of climate change. That too is no more than an hypothesis
that a number (the IPCC are a bit coy about putting actual
percentages to the number) of scientists are of the opinion is correct. >>>
talk bollocks.
What I am on about is that the CO2 hypothesis is no more than that. It
is not, as it is usually presented, proven scientific fact. There is a
correlation between CO2 levels and global temperatures, but there are
plenty of correlations between demonstrably unrelated things:
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
What the all the climate change hypotheses lack is a causal link that
can be supported by experimental data.
Perhaps you don't have children, it seems a feature of climate deniers.
I'd rather not take an unnecessary risk with our over-populated planet
and leave some natural resources for our children and their children.
YMMV
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 87:12:23 |
| Calls: | 6,658 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,333,879 |