iMac Pro review
"There will be no further warming of the planet over the next five years, the Met Office has forecast. The downgrading of its predictions for the effects of climate change means that by 2017 there is projected to have been no global increase in temperature for almost 20 years."
I can't read the whole article as it's behind the pay wall, but it looks like all the doom-sayers will have to revise their predictions! At last I can sleep easy again every time I fill up the A5 with Shell Vpower.
Now where's my stock of incandescent light bulbs! ;-)
Bit more about it here MetOffice I still think it's the planet just doing it's thing, natural cyclical change! Who knows? That's the trouble really, for all their scientific predictions climate forecasting like weather forecasting is as you say wrong quite regularly!
It was rubbish from the start,just a way to tax us.I twigged straight away,they were going to put another nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast,wrong place as they said "the sea is going to rise",oops so if it's on the coast it will get flooded not a good idea for a nuclear instalation.Trouble is "Experts" got on the bandwagon with research grants and any desenters were shouted down,reminds me of the song the "kings new clothes" by Danny Kaye.
Smokers also liked to say that it did nothing to there health. They now have to hide them behind doors and no adverts on the packets. Mans misuse of the planets resources is bound to have an effect, and it will one day BITE BACK
Whatever the case,global warming or not, I notice that the tree's on my property and the neighbourhood are in bud, and that's even after a few frosty nights and early mornings.
Even the hibernation period seemed rather later and much shorter than usual?.
I often wonder what makes the Earth [and the other planets of the Solar System] keep twirling in space ... for billions of years!
When will the batteries 'run out'.
"It was rubbish from the start,just a way to tax us."
You would know all about climate change then, would you?
A forecast (not a statement of fact) from the met office, and you immediately believe it's true. I suspect it's because - like many others - you think that climate change is something you can do nothing about, so you don't bother to look any further into what's actually happening.
Sea levels are rising, albeit not as fast as some people have said. There are two ways for sea levels to rise, one is a perceived rise, caused by land masses sinking, the other is a real rise, caused by polar ice melting.
In some parts of the world the land mass is descending - I live in London, a city that sits on a land mass that is sinking at the rate of around 2mm a year. Additional tidal loads on the land mass makes the city rock up and down by as much as 10mm a day. It's a complex set of circumstances, and similar situations occur in other parts of the world. It means that scientists need to consider every factor before making blanket statements that 'sea levels are rising'. In Southern California, for example, it appeared that sea levels were rising, whereas data from the North of the state showed the level rising, but more slowly. The answer turned out to be that the ocean plate is descending below North America at the Cascadia subduction zone, which runs from northern Vancouver Island in British Columbia to Northern California. The land there is rising as seismic strain builds, Cayan said, making the sea level appear to rise less.
The simple fact is, however, that globally sea levels are very slowly rising, and this can only be due to an increase in the extent of polar ice melt. The melt is caused,of course, by global warming. There's not much point in disputing the warming - the evidence is there for all to see. The debate that rages is about the extent and cause of the warming,and it's entirely possible that the warming is a natural process, a cyclical thing.
Whatever the causes, humanity will bear the consequences. It may take longer, or the process may speed up - we have little idea about that. In the longer term it seems sure that large numbers of people will have their lives directly and adversely affected, and ignoring the facts by making statements that "it was rubbish from the start" is hardly a sensible approach.
"I often wonder what makes the Earth [and the other planets of the Solar System] keep twirling in space ... for billions of years"
I suggest that you Google "Kepler's laws of planetary motion"
I think that our effort to reverse the warming are going to be about as successful as was King Canute's bid to order the tide not to rise etc.
Developing countries are doing the exact opposite to us by their efforts to become better. Who are we to object to that when we went through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries contaminating everything with our improving industry?
The big ten Carbon emitters are (in order of magnitude):-
China, USA, India, Russia, Japan, Germany, Canada, South Korea, Iran, United Kingdom
From which you'll gather that it's not such a great idea to go blaming developing countries when the developed countries (including us)are among the worst offenders.
The size of a problem isn't a justification for saying that there's no point in doing anything - history is full of examples of the human race triumphing in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. I wouldn't like my grandchildren and great grandchildren, when they are lumbered with a massive environmental crisis, to think that I had seen it coming and sat around doing nothing. If I can make even a tiny contribution to a solution I will, for their sake, if for no other reason.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.