Global Warming... a hoax?

[FORMER_FYRDMAN]

[quote="MikeMcc"]

Inflow into the Aral Sea and the Caspian has also decreased but that's all to do with centrally planned irrigation schemes. People use water and the more people there are, the more water they use. The more water you take out of a system (and the longer you keep it out with recycling), the less there is. Likewise, the more people you have in dry areas, the more likely they are to do something which starts a fire - deliberately or otherwise - particularly as these areas are already prone to fires as part of the natural cycle.

Which is why I didn't pick either as examples of climate change. Yet climate change IS A factor in both Australia and and the SW US.[/quote]

Well that's your assertion but you're not providing much evidence. There were fires in Australia and Arizona long before Whitey rocked up and there'll still be fires after it's gone back to the natives, if there's anything left to burn that is. Much of Australia and the US Southwest is desert too so you're talking about marginal areas from the get go, which will always be vulnerable to natural fluctuations. Whatever the arguments about global warming, we know that man can and does impact heavily on eco-systems, particularly fragile ones, and that is where the world's environmental focus should be.

The Thirties dust bowl of the US Mid-West was real but it was not climate change - it's what happens when you use the wrong techniques and overstretch existing resources. The question for these areas is how to manage resources and population densities and they won't get any help in solving that from the various Copenhagen nostrums or carbon trading.

Well that's actually the opinion of the Scripps Institute and the CSIRO

Yes, but the operative word is 'opinion' and CSIRO is a Government institution with incentives to tow the line - there's no evidence offered.

If you read your second block, you will see from your own example that the UN ascribes the water problem to mis-management, not MMGW or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

XYZ's post was to the point. People need infrastructure and there's a limit to what the system can support - if you insist on living in semi-desert areas without the necessary infrastructure and planning, expect to reach that limit sooner rather than later.

Especially if said areas are particularly affected by such things as climate

Everything's affected by climate. The question is what effect man has had on climate. You've yet to post any evidence that we're bang to rights for bush fires in regions where bush fires are part of the natural cycle or that water shortages in desert and semi-desert areas, where demand is increasing, is in some way sinister and not to be expected.

[fraudstar]

As I've repeatedly said, the AGW question is to my mind 4.

Is the climate changing from the previous late Holocene trend.

If it is changing, is this change explainable by natural forcers?

If not, what extent is mankind having on the climate.

If none currently, are human activities, specifically greenhouse gases, deforestation and land change capable of altering the climate.

Unfortunately there are alarmists and doomsayers on one side and ignoramuses and naysayers on the other that bicker over insignificant events in childish point scoring. It doesn't matter if we have heavy snow this christmas if there is a 30 year trend toward warming.

[XYZBush]

I take it the government and the CSIRO are to be distrusted too?

the nice thing about Wikipedia is that it has sources that can be traced; like this one; http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/stories/s938242.htm

CSIRO + ABC - gubiment -federal
department of scorched earth - gubiment -state

Incompetent governments worldwide like (and pay for the fake "science") the global warming hoax because it gives them:

More money and power

An excuse for their incompetence.

[fraudstar]

I take it the government and the CSIRO are to be distrusted too?

the nice thing about Wikipedia is that it has sources that can be traced; like this one; http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/stories/s938242.htm

CSIRO + ABC - gubiment -federal
department of scorched earth - gubiment -state

Incompetent governments worldwide like (and pay for the fake "science") the global warming hoax because it gives them:

More money and power

An excuse for their incompetence.

To suggest that governments pay scientists to produce fake papers in order to increase taxes and increase their power is serious tinfoil hat territory.

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

[XYZBush]

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

Guess who gets grants and who don't.

[Mobat]

To suggest that governments pay scientists to produce fake papers in order to increase taxes and increase their power is serious tinfoil hat territory.

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

The best way to lie is to tell the truth selectively.

Also there are a lot of unspoken agreements going on. If an organisation is set up to study man made climate change, its employees will realise that it is a bad idea to say that it does not exist.

[Mobat]

So, if it is unusually cold that is just weather, whereas if it is unusually dry that is man made climate change?

Unusual cold for short periods is weather.
Even relatively long periods of hot dry weather is still weather.

Climate is defined as weather trends over periods of 30 years, which still indicates increases in temperature. The anti - man made climate change lobbists (like Monckton) love to look at short term trends because anything can be read into them.

My point is that the man made climate change lobbyists are just as keen to quote weather events as “proof� of their case.

[fraudstar]

To suggest that governments pay scientists to produce fake papers in order to increase taxes and increase their power is serious tinfoil hat territory.

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

The best way to lie is to tell the truth selectively.

Also there are a lot of unspoken agreements going on. If an organisation is set up to study man made climate change, its employees will realise that it is a bad idea to say that it does not exist.

Indeed, so whilst there may be hype and scaremongering to encourage more grants and money, the underpinning science is still correct.

[FORMER_FYRDMAN]

To suggest that governments pay scientists to produce fake papers in order to increase taxes and increase their power is serious tinfoil hat territory.

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

The best way to lie is to tell the truth selectively.

Also there are a lot of unspoken agreements going on. If an organisation is set up to study man made climate change, its employees will realise that it is a bad idea to say that it does not exist.

Indeed, so whilst there may be hype and scaremongering to encourage more grants and money, the underpinning science is still correct.

No it isn't, which is why the MMGW lobby struggles to nail the point in open debate and gets involved with information operations straight out of the Dr Goebbels playbook. We are currently discussing wildfires and the efficient use of water resources. Neither of these issues can be tackled effectively using CO2 reduction strategies but that is the club of choice for the great and the good because, apart from anything else, it absolves them from having to make serious and unpopular decisions about real problems.

Please understand that all the horror stories you're telling us about the effects of man-made global warming if we don't get emissions under control are happening now anyway - driven by other factors. We have pressure on resources, habitats and biodiversity and all the MMGW lobby can come up with is to relocate steel production from the UK to India and arrange a series of expensive spoutfests. The MMGW lobby hasn't solved any problems but it's sure as hell diverted funds away from those who might.

[Mobat]

To suggest that governments pay scientists to produce fake papers in order to increase taxes and increase their power is serious tinfoil hat territory.

Althgh they do cherrypick the data and scientists they use to support their position as seen in the Nutt saga.

The best way to lie is to tell the truth selectively.

Also there are a lot of unspoken agreements going on. If an organisation is set up to study man made climate change, its employees will realise that it is a bad idea to say that it does not exist.

Indeed, so whilst there may be hype and scaremongering to encourage more grants and money, the underpinning science is still correct.

What part of “lie� didn't you understand?

If by “underpinning science� you mean that assuming no feedback effects and no external influences man made CO2 will produce a trivial increase in temperature, then that is true.

However, to suggest that that is all there is to climate is a lie.