2014 was the warmest year on record.

[Rheghead]

According to the NOAA, 2014 was the warmest year since records began. I had hoped that the climate change deniers (local, national and foreign) were right and that warming had stopped 16 years ago (despite them ignoring that 2005 and 2010) were warmer. but the thermometer seems to go up relentlessly over the long term. It is even more worrying that this event happened in a non-el Nino year so it is likely that we will see another big hike in global temperature when there is an El nino, in my opinion.

I am also convinced that we will never get agreement to keep the rise below 2 degrees by the end of this century if we do not get the Governments who take this calamity seriously. We need a government that will promote equality, sustainability, people before profit, respect for international law and the environment.

Are you prepared to let this madness carry on?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30852588

[Neil Howie]

The world answers "yes"

and for this and other reasons

the Doomsday clock moves three minutes to midnight


WASHINGTON, D.C. – January 22, 2015 – Warning that “the probability of global catastrophe is very high” unless quick action is taken, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists Science and Security Board today cited unchecked climate change and global nuclear weapons modernization as the basis for their decision to move the hands of the historic Doomsday Clock forward two minutes. The shift of the Doomsday Clock hands to three minutes to midnight is the first such adjustment to be made in three years. The Board also outlined action steps that will need to be taken “very soon” in order to avert catastrophe.

[Green_not_greed]

Well false data which underpins that headline fills me with no sense of belief in the statement at all.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/1...l-warming.html

[RIR]

http://heartland.org/press-releases/...ht?artId=16260 Ian.

[Rheghead]

Well false data which underpins that headline fills me with no sense of belief in the statement at all.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/1...l-warming.html

Christopher Booker? Face/palm

The denier's sentinel incarnate..

[Rheghead]

http://heartland.org/press-releases/...ht?artId=16260 Ian.

Michael Crichton? He is another denier. No training in science.

[RIR]

No, perhaps not. But carrying numerous quotations from people who have, or had.

[badger]

Believe the BBC when it comes to climate change and you'll believe anything. Their policy is based on the decisions of a committee packed with propagandists and they are so biased it's a disgrace and contrary to their constitution. There is just as much evidence to show that the planet is not warming and many believe we are in for a mini ice age but the climate change industry is so rich and powerful they can gag and ridicule opposition. IPCC reports are changed every time by the propagandists after what has been agreed by the scientists on the panel, who regularly complain but are ignored.

[Rheghead]

Believe the BBC when it comes to climate change and you'll believe anything. Their policy is based on the decisions of a committee packed with propagandists and they are so biased it's a disgrace and contrary to their constitution. There is just as much evidence to show that the planet is not warming and many believe we are in for a mini ice age but the climate change industry is so rich and powerful they can gag and ridicule opposition. IPCC reports are changed every time by the propagandists after what has been agreed by the scientists on the panel, who regularly complain but are ignored.

What do 97% of climate scientists that are studying the climate say? You know, the ones who aren't getting a wee brown envelop every time they try to derail intellectual consensus?

[Rheghead]

And now the Met Office has 2014 as the warmest tied with 2010. How can two independent bodies get virtually the same answer?

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/rel...al-temperature

[badger]

The key is in the word independent. They're not and that's the problem. The Met Office has been severely criticised for their statements. If the whole discussion was being looked at by truly independent, qualified climate experts we might get somewhere.

[Rheghead]

The key is in the word independent. They're not and that's the problem. The Met Office has been severely criticised for their statements. If the whole discussion was being looked at by truly independent, qualified climate experts we might get somewhere.

Err how do you come to that conclusion that they are not independent??

They are using different datasets, you know, 'different people' taking 'different measurements' with 'different instruments' and then analysing the 'different data' on 'different computers'.

It is extremely difficult to introduce some form of collusion there.