where are the sceptics

[lakeland27]

lying low having a bit of a re-think ? where is  lord Monkton this summer ? ian pilmer on holidays ?

dont worry though, Tone the man says its all BS (maybe he;s been blinded by his own ?) 

[lakeland27]

yes i saw that donna, looks like the next 200 years will be back to normal then ?

[monman12]

I think the first comment to the article  is perfect:

"Weather is not climate"

[lakeland27]

I think the first comment to the article  is perfect:

"Weather is not climate"

after reading the comments i'm still none the wiser to the relevance of such a remark. except maybe the fact that Records do not give the full picture. Averages being more the point.

[donnashuggy]

If this is global warming then I personally quite like it (in bondi)

Christmas 2011 everyone was huddled up in the garden on banana chairs fighting over blankets.

Christmas 2012 was cool, we had 21 people eating in the kitchen with roast in the oven and it was wonderfully cool (raining outside)

Not a fly in sight, not taking the P, this is exactly how it is here, if we get one EXTREMELY hot day and two weeks of cool weather it is better than CONSTANT hot weather.

How is that for a positive spin? Could I get a job writing for The Australian?

[the_great_she_elephant]

yes i saw that donna, looks like the next 200 years will be back to normal then ?

That article was published on 14th January, and his 1790 record has already been superceded.. If temperatures continue the way they are he may well have egg on his face by 14th March.

[ashjoma]

Have the people who seem to say nothing good about Lord Monkton seen him speak ?

I have - he is very intelligent, well spoken, well researched and articulate.

He sat behind me when other speakers were doing their presentations and I can assure you he was very polite, sat quietly and let them speak and showed interest in what they were saying.

No-one is denying pollution is a bad thing, but CO2 is not a pollutant, is an essential gas, we would not have life without it.

The climate is always changing -  it is part of the life of this planet and the sun is the major factor and the cycles the sun goes through.

There is a much bigger agenda at play here - the globalists admit this and needed something to get started.  This was introduced to bring about a 'global problem', bring in a global tax, increase the power of the UN, reduce the standard of living in the west,  herd people into compact cities, ultimately bring in a one world govt.

All is now underway.  eg  European Union, trading blocks    (has to be done bit by bit so people do not realise)

I suggest research into

Agenda 21

ICLEI

WILDLANDS PROJECT

Watch Agenda 21 for dummies on youtube.

You can see Bob Brown on youtube stating his wish for a one world govt.

.

[the_great_she_elephant]

No-one is denying pollution is a bad thing, but CO2 is not a pollutant, is an essential gas, we would not have life without it.

Or with too much of it. 

Vitamins are also necessary to sustain life, but swallowing megadoses can make you seriously ill.

[monman12]

"Weather is not climate"

LL: "after reading the comments i'm still none the wiser to the relevance of such a remark."

The point being that unlike "climate", weather is localised, and normally within  a short term and transitory time frame (day/s). Climate refers to atmospheric conditions affecting continents/countries over much longer periods of times such as  weeks/years.

Where does  this  mantra of the skeptics originate? : "And with the satellites unable to detect any global warming for the last 16 years"  What nonsense.

IF, and LD, forget selecting the odd  utterances, and research what various professional scientific bodies HERE and overseas are  expressing. Why are you not prepared to consider the atmospheric studies/data/conclusions of the CSIRO, or the BoM?

[icyfroth]

Most of it is now known to be false, thats whats known. i didn't point out the deficiences of  the Citizens Electoral Council' to make anyone look bad except the Citizens Electoral Council' btw. i'll avoid that nerve next time.

I just wanted to adress this post before I go home. I've been busy all day and not been able to get back earlier. I see we've moved right along and I wonder how long the thread will last.

LL it wasn't my intention to make the Labor Party look bad either. My response was simply to illustrate that it's quite easy to dismiss the message by discrediting the messenger.

Did you find anything in the material worth considering or did you just dismiss it out of hand because you think the CEC dodgy? Or didn't you even bother reading it?

Seeyas when I get home.

[lakeland27]

i did read it, and i accept what you are saying. i was hopeful this would not be a partisan issue, but coming from me i guess that's a prety tall order. i should have refrained from partisan comments in the OP i guess 🙂