Huhne plans 32,000 more wind turbines

[BlasterBates]

<Sigh> Its Morner again. You know - the guy who rotates graphs on the page to get the trend he wants (fig 5). We expect this from Chris Booker and now the Spectator have embarrassed themselves also.

The Spectator runs false sea-level claims on its cover | Mark Lynas and George Monbiot | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Since when was George Monbiot an authority on sea level changes?

[scooterscot]

scientific study looks for cause and effect, not correllations

If that not causality?

Is scientific study not about proving a result by disproving all other possibilities?

[doodab]

Oh and another thing. I don't really care for this global warming malarkey, the earth has heated up in the past I'm sure it shall again. The question is our ability to adapt to the changing conditions.

What infuriates me wrt global warming science is:

1) Politicians debasing good science by using flawed concepts to harm fantastic engineering projects.

2) Politicians dreaming up new taxes based on inevitable change we have little control over.

PS: It's snowing!! May have to abandon the car this evening if this keeps up.

My bad, it's called "sustainable energy, without the hot air" by Dr David Mckay. He wrote it because he is fed up with all the twaddle and lack of actual facts being presented on the subject. It's not actually about global warming, it's about how much energy we use, where it comes from at the moment and where it might come from in the future, and it has actual numbers in, and very little bias. You really should read it.

http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/s...tex/sewtha.pdf

[doodab]

Is scientific study not about proving a result by disproving all other possibilities?

I think that was Sherlock Holmes.

[BlasterBates]

...and yet another debunk of the hockey stick on Professor Judith Curry's website

The long, slow thaw? | Climate Etc.

It really is piling on the AGW crowd.

[DodgyAgent]

Monbiot just like everyone else justifies the integrity of what he says by dishing the agendas of everyone else. He is
a leftie who has an agenda of his very own and his views are supported by scientists who again have their own agendas by being in the pay of government. Who do you believe?? One thing is for sure that getting fanatical about something that has been going on for millions of years (climate change) when you only have at the most 100 years of recorded data to go on is pathetic.

Climate change is not about nature and the environment it is about politics

[DimPrawn]

Monbiot just like everyone else justifies the integrity of what he says by dishing the agendas of everyone else. He is
a leftie who has an agenda of his very own and his views are supported by scientists who again have their own agendas by being in the pay of government. Who do you believe?? One thing is for sure that getting fanatical about something that has been going on for millions of years (climate change) when you only have at the most 100 years of recorded data to go on is pathetic.

Climate change is not about nature and the environment it is about politics

And control and money. And probably sex too.

[doodab]

And control and money. And probably sex too.

You mean these people who want to **** the environment mean it literally?

[BlasterBates]

The number of 'sceptics' with a vaguely relevant qualification is so vanishingly small, they have to be recycled over and over again, long after they have been repeatedly disowned by their discipline and revealed as long-retired, water-divining, ancient site-despoiling, credential-faking, graph-rotating nutjobs.

As I say personal defamation.

He isn't just a blogger, his results have been published. You may disagree but you can't argue it isn't a valid scientific viewpoint.

When you conduct a scientific debate you don't dismiss published scientific papers by personal defamation of the author. You need reasoned debate.

What have you got to say about the Satellite data not simply being published as observed but being "adjusted".

[BlasterBates]

Axell-Nils Mörner wasn't just a scientist at INQUA he was the president of it for 13 years. Hard to believe isn't it that they left a "nutcase" in charge for so long. His eminent contribution to oceanography is undisputed,

Here are some actual sea level observations from around the world: