• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Climate change (Why do PFK bother with blogs?)

Dave Spencer

Member
Joined
3 Jul 2007
Messages
1,387
Location
N. Wales
They start a blog about the Amazon drying up, but then delete any posts that try to give an alternative view to their beliefs for the reasons. The same goes with an "ocean acidification" blog I tried to post on.

Here is the Amazon blog:

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/c ... p?sid=3329

They like to think they are cutting edge, but they lack the minerals for that. Personally, I think they should just stick to their title; keeping fish, as they lack the broadness of mind for anything else.

Dave.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Thanks for that, George. I like to think we tell people on UKAPS why posts are removed.

Reading up on climate change is a bit of an obsession for me. :oops: Especially since I have changed over to being an AGW sceptic.

Dave.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Dave Spencer said:
They start a blog about the Amazon drying up, but then delete any posts that try to give an alternative view to their beliefs for the reasons. The same goes with an "ocean acidification" blog I tried to post on.

Here is the Amazon blog:

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/c ... p?sid=3329

They like to think they are cutting edge, but they lack the minerals for that. Personally, I think they should just stick to their title; keeping fish, as they lack the broadness of mind for anything else.

Dave.

Didnt Mr Heiko Bleher write that article?

He may not have requested its removal, but he has done similar on various rainbowfish forums.
I have a lot of respect for him, but he has often not taken well to alternative opinons. He has done so much for the hobby, but I have noticed this kind of attitude amongst some experts in their various fields, its a shame, it stiffles discussion and advancing ideas.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Dave Spencer said:
Thanks for that, George. I like to think we tell people on UKAPS why posts are removed.

Reading up on climate change is a bit of an obsession for me. :oops: Especially since I have changed over to being an AGW sceptic.

Dave.

Why not discuss that issue here? I would like to know about other positions.

UKAPS does not have any agreement with PFK, so I am sure that the posts would not be removed.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Luis, I believe climate change is far and away the most important subject on man`s agenda at the moment, barring getting our economies moving upwards again (which climate change policies could well negate anyway).

When we speculate on the trillions and trillions of pounds due to be spent worldwide on renewables, and the cost of Ed Milliband`s Climate Change Bill for us in the UK, we are looking at being financially crippled, and being unable to keep the lights on.

There are a million and one topics that could be discussed but, alas, I spend far too much time discussing the climate elsewhere, already.

Dave.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

I think its just a money making angle,i personally think the worlds weather goes in cycles,the climate may be getting warmer overall,but if the last couple of winters in this country are anything to go by then i don,t really believe it,by the same token if our weather became like spain,s or or any other country in the med i could handle that,but alas i will be dead and gone before that happens,

regards,
john.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

I also think that the weather goes in cycles.

But we do pump a lot of nasties into the atmosphere, and we pollute the world soils and seas.

Also we do not recycle, we buy more than what we need, we always looking into the new shinny thing, the fancy clothes, and we want it cheap. How many think about the impact of buying a new TV?

For the past few years I have been recycling more, and trying to reuse what I have, but it is hard when consumerism is coming at us all the time with adverts, articles on magazines and TV shows, but I believe that we can fight it off.

Global warming is real, but it may just be a natural cycle, we have not been around the world long enough to know how it really works.

The amazon rivers dried out, exposing some old paintings. It had to be that dry before, otherwise they couldn't have been painted, right? :D
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

With Cancun just around the corner, ocean acidification will be the next battle ground chosen by the CAGW crowd.

"Between 1751 and 1994 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.179 to 8.104, a change of −0.075 on the logarithmic pH scale which corresponds to an increase of 18.9% in H+ (acid) concentration."

In layman`s terms, I could put it that in the last 250 years the pH of the oceans has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1. The statement raises a few questions:

a) What were they using in 1751 that could measure pH to three decimal places?

b) What was causing the drop in pH (probably called a "pH crash" in CAGW terms) prior to the period when they start to blame man burning fossil fuels?

c) Are there any reefers on this site that know of any creature that can`t cope with this kind of pH change over a 250 year period?

d) Doesn`t the pH vary from place to place?

A company called POGO (Partnership for the Observation of Global Oceans) has requested funding to the tune of $15 billion for an ocean acidification monitoring system.

The World Health Organisation estimate that $42 billion is required to supply half of the people on this planet that have no or limited access, to an uninterrupted supply of clean water.

Ed Milliband has passed a climate Change Act that will cost the UK tax payers £734 billion between now and 2050 in an attempt to cut UK CO2 emissions by 80% by the use of wind power. Pure fantasy, and a crime.

How come this kind of money isn`t available to tackle the real problems of this world? The World Health Organisation estimate that $42 billion is required to supply half of the people on this planet that otherwise have no or limited access, to an uninterrupted supply of clean water.

Dave. :?
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Shocking but then again, why the surprise? Someone has to buy the wind farms, pay the scientists and technical people that work for those orgs, and people need something to worry about.

Clean water for everyone? Nonsense, rather sell them purification units. And sick people are poor people, poor people cannot defend their rights, and are ripped off. Either by war (weapon sales), their resources (oil, minerals, fish, wood) or loaned money.

Climate change is real and here, but there are a lot of companies milking the system.

Ed Miliband wants to spend money on the wind farms. Great. Who owns the wind farms? Wasn't there a piece of news recently about the queen getting money from the wind farms?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-wo ... -22657254/

So the Queen gets up to 38m a year, time that by 40 years, a fair wack.. :)

Just an example..
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Dave Spencer said:
With Cancun just around the corner, ocean acidification will be the next battle ground chosen by the CAGW crowd.

"Between 1751 and 1994 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.179 to 8.104, a change of −0.075 on the logarithmic pH scale which corresponds to an increase of 18.9% in H+ (acid) concentration."

In layman`s terms, I could put it that in the last 250 years the pH of the oceans has dropped from 8.2 to 8.1. The statement raises a few questions:

a) What were they using in 1751 that could measure pH to three decimal places?

Good question! I had a go at googling this for 2 mins so now I'm an expert ( :lol: ). From what I can gather the stated ph change is an estimate based on recent 'good' data that has been extrapolated back to the start of the industrial revolution. There might be some real experts who could clarify this, it would be interesting to know.

Dave Spencer said:
c) Are there any reefers on this site that know of any creature that can`t cope with this kind of pH change over a 250 year period?

d) Doesn`t the pH vary from place to place?

Yes I believe ph varies from place to place and over time periods by larger amounts as do many other ocean parameters. Although the ph changes seem small you have to bear in mind that the scientists are talking about global averages. Also the global buffering potential of the ocean is huge so to change the ph by even a tiny fraction requires huge changes in CO2 levels.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

The Met "BBQ Summer" Office are in fine form. :lol:

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/vie ... Met-Office

For those interested, Phil Jones at the CRU has so far adjusted temperature anomalies for the UK twice this year...upwards of course. I wonder if this has anything to do with Cancun? :shifty: In the US GISS are doing the same via James Hansen.

changes_in_hadcrut_temperature_anomalies_from_june_3_to_july_28.jpg


The Hadley Centre are currently readjusting further so that they can declare 2010 to be the hottest year on record for the UK. The current cold snap will make it very difficult for them to sound plausible.

Dave.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Lol. One of those subjects to be taken with a pinch of salt :)

It is purely (IMO) a method of trying to slow down the emerging economies who are using high carbon methods in their infrasturcture. In essence the 'rich' (maybe we should say the formerly rich at present) western countries trying to slow down the newer emerging powerhouses.

In most cases it is the western world's fault for selling the 'old tech' gear to those countries in the first place. Think India and UK for instance. UK spent the past 5+ years selling low efficiency engines and such product. Now what should they do? Stop and buy newer tech product?

THE UK/Europe/USA spent decades flogging off this poor technology and making vast sums from it. Very happy back then. Not so happy now it is on the other foot and we are buying more product from them than we sell to them.

As for the topic argument. Is global warming a reality?...Yes of course it is.
Is it due to man?.Maybe.

However people seem to have forgotten the ice age and............

........maybe in a century or 2 all the dinosaurs will suddenly become extinct. Deja-vu et al.

TC
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Hi all,
I agree they shouldn't have deleted the posts, I have no idea what is happening, or how it will end. But, I work with a couple of climate scientists, one who is a micro-fossil palaeontologist and the other is a remote sensor/meteorologist. They would tell you unequivocally that global warming is happening and that it is caused by the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Despite what was written about "climate-gate", there is virtually no dissent from this view amongst scientists, no global conspiracy or any "smoking gun" from the UEA emails. Have a look here: <http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/>

What the scientists can't tell you is what will happen next to the climate or the oceans, or how exactly the climatic cycles interact with one another over geological time. This is because no-one knows, all they can do is extrapolate from the data they have collected, and then build probability models. It is not that scientists lie or are dishonest about their research, it is quite the opposite, because they deal in probability they are very reluctant to make definite statements. This reluctance to commit is often seized upon by those who have a vested interest in obscuring the facts as "they don't know", "it is only a theory" etc..

I look at it this way, if you are ill, who do you want to see? a qualified medical Doctor, or someone who has read about medicine in the Daily Express/Mail etc? You might be really unlucky and get a Doctor who isn't very good, or a lay person who makes you feel better, but the probability is that you won't.

cheers Darrel
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Darrel, you have linked to the very people who were under investigation. Is it not surprising they write a page with their own vindication?
Could you tell me how your friends can be so unequivocally sure? There is zero unequivocal evidence of man`s finger print on the climate. How can your friends blame global warming on GHG when the system is vastly more complex to be driven by just this one forcing. Water vapour is by far the greatest GHG by volume out their, yet noone has proved whether the feed back is positive or negative.

Hang slack Darrel, as I will compile some information for you on the lying by Phil Jones, Michael Mann et al to the IPCC, WMO and Government policy makers, and the blatant deleting of information rather than adhere to the FOI Act.

I used to believe all the alarming predictions from the likes of James Hansen et al, but once I started to read on the subject, I couldn`t believe how ridiculous mother nature was making them look.

Dave.
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

Hi all,
Dave you are not obliged to believe what the majority of scientists who work in any field are saying, it is entirely a matter of probabilities, it is just a "best guess" based upon the data they have.
There is zero unequivocal evidence of man`s finger print on the climate. How can your friends blame global warming on GHG when the system is vastly more complex to be driven by just this one forcing. Water vapour is by far the greatest GHG by volume out their, yet noone has proved whether the feed back is positive or negative. Hang slack Darrel, as I will compile some information for you on the lying by Phil Jones, Michael Mann et al to the IPCC, WMO and Government policy makers, and the blatant deleting of information rather than adhere to the FOI Act.
If you sincerely belief that these people have devoted their working careers and professional credibility to a huge conspiracy theory and have been willing to lie and cheat to support this, that is your choice. Personally I don't and I'll post this graph (note from the CRU, and based upon the data they have collected) and people can draw their own conclusions.

gat.gif


cheers Darrel
 
Re: Why do PFK bother with blogs?

I have had to make three posts because I kept getting some message about how many quotes I could embed.

dw1305 said:
Hi all,
Dave you are not obliged to believe what the majority of scientists who work in any field are saying,

Darryl, this is argumentum ad populum. Science is not a concensus, which someone as clearly scientifically minded as yourself will know. Besides, this majority of scientists, of which I have seen many painstakingly compiled lists, conveniently ignores those from Russia, China, India, Japan, etc.

How many people on here know that there is a meeting in Cancun, or what it is about? The news is about the severe weather, the World Cup bid :( and student riots. Even David cameron chose Zurich and the World Cup over Cancun. It seems these scientists hold little sway. Recently, the Royal Society withdrew its publication "Climate Change, a Summary of the Science".

The Minister for Climate Change admits that 95% of the greenhouse effect is caused by water vapour, only 4% by natural carbon dioxide and only 0.117% by man-made carbon dioxide.
 
Back
Top