With all due respect, you're falling over your own feet in your attempts to be funny and sarcastic and dismissive all at once. It doesn't work for me and I don't think it works for you. To avoid further confusion I will give plain, straightforward responses to each of your comments, whether you intended them to be taken at face value or not. Here goes:
lyndon taylor wrote:We are entering a period of global cooling in the northern Hemisphere, its called winter, however disturbingly in the southern hemisphere things are getting much hotter. Maybe that's what explains the OP's confusion on the topic!!!
Yep! I live in The Northern Hemisphere! That explains it.
The Northern Hemisphere is entering winter. Weather is not climate but a surprising number of people do get one cold spell and declare global warming must have stopped or never existed in the first place.
Assuming you are not making that (very dumb) mistake, you may still be having colder-than-usual winters and they still don't disprove global warming, since is the global
average over the whole year
which is increasing. Hidden under that basic statistic are all sorts of local variations, one of which happens to be colder winters in the northern US and in Europe.
So, should we listen only to the Australian Climatologists or not?
but also. Certainly listen more to climatologists than to anyone else, whether Aussie or not.
Incidentally, that cheap shot reveals that you haven't taken the time to follow most (any?) of the links I posted earlier, since nearly all of them are to US sites and experts. The odd one out is a worldwide group of climatologists led by an Aussie and a German but based in the US.
Ron-The-Elder wrote:Apologies for my lame posts from Energy Companies.
What could energy producers possibly know about heat energy gain and loss?
All they have to know is engineering heat gain and loss in their refinery and transport operations.
Also, please avoid posting Corporate Opinions from companies, which profit from this issue and present only data from qualified scientific resources like NASA, The National Geological Society, The UN, and The World Homeopathic Society.
I'm not quite sure what you mean here but I will guess.
(1) You think we should be wary of "authorities" and "experts" with vested interests. I agree. But the biggest vested interests, by far, are the fossil fuel companies. If we decarbonise to avert catastrophic climate change, their profits plummet and so does the value of all their assets: if we leave the oil and coal in the ground, it's worth nothing. That gives them tens of billions of reasons to lie about climate, and they have been lying systematically ever since they realised there was a problem. Look at "Dollars for Deniers: Big Oil Funds Climate Science Denialism (Daily Kos)" linked in my previous post for details, and/or The Merchants of Doubt http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/
(2) You think NASA and The World Homeopathic Society have equal competence and credibility on climate change. You are wrong.
In other words, don't do as I have done. Do what I say!
You posted links and a quote. So did I.
Ron-The-Elder wrote:And then, moderator, please lock this thread.
I'm prepared to debate the issue as long as necessary. The mods are unlikely to step in and lock it unless we break the TOS which I seem to remember happening in a previous thread on the subject ... accusations of bad faith or lying or abuse, IIRC. I don't lie (though I can occasionally be mistaken) and I don't attack people for their sincerely held opinions, although I can and will attack unjustifiable opinions. How long the thread stays open is therefore up to you.
I now see the error of my ways.
If so, fine - but you don't have to
Okay ... over to you. My view is that this is a serious issue, affecting the wellbeing of literally tens of millions of people in the coming decades if we don't address it, and deserves to be taken seriously. For that reason I have limitless patience for anyone with genuine questions who is willing to listen to answers.