2012 - The summer that never was?

[Dave Brown]

I The massive record smashing ice melt in Greenland this summer is testament to what is happening and science is starting to admit that they are baffled.

No, they are not baffled, as it happens every 150 years. It is another cycle that has not been accounted for, before now

[Tom2006]

Well I must have read a different article because the scientist quoted said they were not sure why it was happening. Global warming is happening Dave, no question, and considering this is occurring whilst the sun is so quiet, I can see why some quarters are worried. If it means a warmer UK I'll be happy.

[Nathan]

The way I see it is that the world is warming, but as with the predicted outcome of climate change, we are seeing wacky weather all over the world, with extremes being recorded all the time... We have been getting a few cold winters & rubbish summers, but other parts of the world have been having record warm winters & hot summers, the planet is simply trying to balance itself out... Now if man is playing a part in this climate shift I don't know, I believe for the most part is is simply a natural cycle which happens, but perhaps being speeded along with the help of man...

[Dave Brown]

Well I must have read a different article because the scientist quoted said they were not sure why it was happening.

Ah, that is different, They know it happens with regularity, but are baffled as to why, as it is not linked to global warming, which is what some would have liked us to believe.

[Tom2006]

Well I must have read a different article because the scientist quoted said they were not sure why it was happening.

Ah, that is different, They know it happens with regularity, but are baffled as to why, as it is not linked to global warming, which is what some would have liked us to believe.

You say that with confidence, how so?

[Dave Brown]

Well I must have read a different article because the scientist quoted said they were not sure why it was happening.

Ah, that is different, They know it happens with regularity, but are baffled as to why, as it is not linked to global warming, which is what some would have liked us to believe.

You say that with confidence, how so?

I should qualify it more.

It doesn't seem to be linked to increased CO2 as it was happening before. The major problem is we (UK) are killing our competitiveness in an effort to reduce our tiny CO2 output, while other massive contributors don't bother, and we have not conclusively proved CO2 has anything to do with it

[Tom2006]

You say that with confidence, how so?[/quote]
I should qualify it more.

It doesn't seem to be linked to increased CO2 as it was happening before. The major problem is we (UK) are killing our competitiveness in an effort to reduce our tiny CO2 output, while other massive contributors don't bother, and we have not conclusively proved CO2 has anything to do with it [/quote]

But equally we haven't disproved it. In the main I agree with you Dave, although personally I think the globe is warming at a very alarming rate, I don't think man is all to blame, but is contributing. I think the current chaos in our global climate is far from like anything in history and is only going to get worse. If that means an overall warmer UK I will be happy.

[Trainer John]

John, we should really keep it academic when dealing with sources, for example; whatupwiththat, is a site biased against the climate change, really we need academic papers; aka, real scientists doing real research. Often these other sites are crackpot sites and should be ignored; for example iceagenow, or globalwarmingforever.

I was an academic, studying statistical ecology to PhD level and beyond after chemistry/zoology undergraduate studies and a masters in ecology under Greig-Smith and Reynoldson at Bangor. I may have moved into teaching and then, after significant illness, into IT training and finally to retirement but I can still recognise bullshit science when I see it. And what I see with too many climate scientists is poor understanding of statistical techniques, massive over-reliance on models which in some cases (the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia is a case in point) are so shoddily constructed to be worthless, direct manipulation of data to produce the results they want to see, pal rather than true peer review, and refusal to archive source data to avoid others pointing out the blatent cherry picking of datasets to chime with preconcieved ideas.

This is not science as I was taught it and practiced it. There is more true science on display at some of the blogs you disparage than in the scientific papers of such as Mann, Briffa and Muller. Yes, there is also a vast amount of crappe out there but most of the wilder exaggerations and downright lunacy are fairly easy to spot. As with any contentious issue this is a problem with both sides of the argument.

[stephenprudence]

To be frank though John, I don't generally read anything on a contentious issue like this, unless the article/paper has been peer reviewed. Then again I don't really like the read up on these issues too often.

I certainly don't trust such sites though, personally.


As for the rest of Meteorological summer, it's pretty much odds on to finish below average once again, with a continuation of unsettled conditions, in fact it could feel pretty Autumnal at times during the next week, with heavy rain and very strong winds.

I just hope high pressure asserts itself around early to mid-Autumn, or the pattern change we want to see now, will occur into late Autumn/Winter, which is not good news in terms of frost etc.

[Nigel]

John, we should really keep it academic when dealing with sources, for example; whatupwiththat, is a site biased against the climate change, really we need academic papers; aka, real scientists doing real research. Often these other sites are crackpot sites and should be ignored; for example iceagenow, or globalwarmingforever.

I was an academic, studying statistical ecology to PhD level and beyond after chemistry/zoology undergraduate studies and a masters in ecology under Greig-Smith and Reynoldson at Bangor. I may have moved into teaching and then, after significant illness, into IT training and finally to retirement but I can still recognise bullshit science when I see it. And what I see with too many climate scientists is poor understanding of statistical techniques, massive over-reliance on models which in some cases (the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia is a case in point) are so shoddily constructed to be worthless, direct manipulation of data to produce the results they want to see, pal rather than true peer review, and refusal to archive source data to avoid others pointing out the blatent cherry picking of datasets to chime with preconcieved ideas.

This is not science as I was taught it and practiced it. There is more true science on display at some of the blogs you disparage than in the scientific papers of such as Mann, Briffa and Muller. Yes, there is also a vast amount of crappe out there but most of the wilder exaggerations and downright lunacy are fairly easy to spot. As with any contentious issue this is a problem with both sides of the argument.

The Berkley Group said pretty much the same thing. They then checked all the figures, using sceptic scientists , funded largely by oil company money, and the result was ????
The figures were correct !!!!!!!

[Dim]

HAARP ....