Um, no. We haven’t measured atmospheric moisture (the primary GHG) over historic periods and there’s proper science indicating a link between solar radiation and clouds.
Perhaps it’s the sun after all?
In this instance of Rutherglen, the lesson is not whether the world has warmed or cooled. It’s that the Bureau of Meteorology has turned a cooling trend measured by actual thermometers into a warming trend by fiddling the data.
Sadly, the models don’t predict accurately enough to be able to confidently base massive government expenditure on that basis. The models have not been validated. They uniformly predict much more warming than actual measurements - see the graphs I linked to above. In other words, the science says they’re wrong.
The average global temperature is a concoction. Most are a conglomeration of secret codes unavailable for peer review which somehow magically produce a number of unbelievable accuracy (to a couple of decimal places) when the data fed in is never to that standard, is widely and unevenly distributed and subject to various national bodies’ adjustments and fiddling. The best (only reasonably reliable) is the UAH satellite data. At least its data and methods are openly available for peer review and has been altered after such expert input has refined the method ie continuously and publicly corrected as better measurement or computer algorithms become available.
show me some data from a thermometer?
There is one in the UK and one in Australia with 80 plus years of data, where the climate warming conspiracy theory people get the data for their models is unknown.
Which is probably why their models are so inaccurate?
Like I said go ask a Meteorologist that works for a commodities trader, that industry thinks we are about to go into global cooling, again.
Thermometers measures present temperature and records from them only go back a bit over a century. If you want to know about temperatures, climate and CO2 levels further back it comes from scientific research, like drilling for ice core in the Antarctic, on Greenland and in the Himalayas.
Prediction about the future climate on the earth is better left to scientists as well, not to some expat “experts” sitting around a table at a Marina in Singapore swapping stories about how bad the stupid locals are and solving the world’s problems, incl. global warming.
BTW; Global warming is global and happening now, not only in the future.
It isn’t something that happen (or don’t happen) at some place in the OZ Outback and it cannot be wished away by you and your buddies. Or washed away by Tiger.
(“After another round or two of Tiger there is NOTHING we cannot fix”.
PS> I’m an Anchor man myself. That was “The Beer of Singapore” in my young and tender days. If you ordered a beer back then a large cold Anchor was served:
Now, when you order an Anchor the “conversation” goes something like this:
“You want what ahh, Uncle??”
“An Anchor, please”
“Tiger can??”
“No, Anchor. Bottle”
“Tiger??”
“ANCHOR!!!”
“Anchor no have one, Tiger??”
"Ohh @&!*, Give me a Tiger
Regardless of a mythical figure of the “global temperature” (which exists nowhere on Earth other than in scientists’ theoretical calculations), we humans live in local areas and we are therefore much more interested in our local temperatures and our local sea levels and our local rainfall and wind, frosts, sunshine and snow.
So I don’t give a lying fig what the global temperature is declared to be by a bunch of so-called experts. What matters to me is what happens locally. That’s where I live. And right now it’s bloody freezing … colder than those Anchor beers … the one thing we agree on.
I think I told it before but on a Shell tanker a new third engineer joined us who introduced himself to the other officers with: “I am Bertus Anchor Pils”. For those who had sailed in the East this was common knowledge but not for us Westerners. He was perplexed and shocked that we had no Anchor beer on board, he had to drink much to his frustration our Heineken Horse Piss as he called it.
The difference between Climate and Weather was been explained before, but have apparently not been understood by everybody. The link posted by K.C. above may have been missed, so here it is again:
You may have misunderstood … deliberately. I was saying I live in a LOCAL climate, not a GLOBAL climate. Look out your window and you can see yours too. Are you frying?
Singapore is a tiny place with many many regional and some global headquarters for all sorts of businesses.
Its seems that for all the years you spent in Singapore you only ever connected with the local beer and food stall holders, how did you not meet and chat with all these expat CEO’s etc where you get the real story?
Yes all the expat experts, probably concentrated more here than most cities anywhere on the planet
You view of Singapore is very narrow mined much like a HDB local who believes everything in the newspaper which it seems is the basis for all your information.
I feel sorry for you that you missed out on all that over your time here.
Your view seems to be that a scientist or in fact any expert is a mythical figure in some far away place.
How is it possible there are climate scientists working in Singapore, they have to work somewhere?
As you well know the Singapore Gov does invest in research and in large scale projects and guess what, expat experts get paid to come and fulfill those roles and they dont get locked up in a laboratory, they do get out on the weekend.
I know it might be in your wildest dream to meet one but you never know…
They drink beer and go sailing
PS yes Anchor was the beer of choice years ago the gov forced the move to promote Tiger to promote Singapore Inc. and for 20 years you can get a Tiger in London.
For arguments sake let us say there is no global warming, the scientists are all wrong, even Exxon’s
Next let’s find out the objections to cleaner energy. Since the imposition of clean air mandates over the last 50 years smog and cancer rates have gone down. Quality of life has improved. Unless one has a financial interest in continuing to use dirty fuels to produce energy that can be produced from cleaner forms I fail to see the objection.
Depends what you mean by “dirty”. If you mean those emitting CO2 I can’t see what’s dirty. It’s lovely, clean plant food. If you mean soot I agree. But where’s the soot?
Strangely, enviro-zealots have to revert to photos of power station cooling towers back-lit by a twilight sky to make the billowing, escaping steam look black and scary. That’s because they can’t find smoke coming out of smoke stacks in western democracies to photograph the evil they abhor. I’m happy they cleaned that up.
I have met some and was not impressed. They are most talking about how clever they are and how useless the locals are.
They appreciate that Singapore is clean, safe and that when you turn on the tap clean water comes, when you flip a switch light comes on and internet is working, though.
Well now there are 9 less of them that think they are above the law:
Well, perhaps trivial, have not had “Anchor” beer. It sounds tasty. A cool "Lone Star " after a hot day in Texas wasn’t too shabby. And yes, a few of the pay phone booths had a pullout wooden seat while calling home. It cost a nickel for local calls.Long distance? Bring a bucketful of quarters. But leave a tip for those cowgirls. They were the best.
I am lucky to live in a benign climate. I wouldn’t know how to deal with such low temperatures as 10.3°C. How do you survive that? It’s for the brave and reckless I suppose. Brrrr.
On a foggy day, with 100% humidity and a fresh breeze blowing it can feel awfully cold, although the thermometer shows +10C, or above.
This was especially so before Air-con was common in people’s houses. (1960s-70s, when I spent some time there) Houses were built to be cool in the summer, not insulated for the winters.
