Not a single Google search resulted in any of those citations, Zenob. I have a set of sites I peruse most every day and I read them too. I must admit I didn't include citations I have noted in my collections of the change in bird migration reflecting warming climes, or the extraordinary heat wave in South West Australia (nor the record flooding there recently). A recent study found that most climate extremes to 1998 were heat events but since then, appears that the majority of extreme events are cold.*Random googling snipped*
climate change deniers have a habit of just googling shit at random
he thinks that since we have had hard winters or winter storms that this MUST refute global climate change.
You assume much Zenob. I really think we are seeing massive climate change. I don't know what will be the result but I do know the estimates by the IPCC have been found to be too conservative.
Zenob, I would appreciate your pointing out the evidence of a Telegraph reporter quackery. That could be valuable for me, TIA.
Platypus, take a look at that film I linked to earlier on the Hamaker hypothesis. I was glad to find it on the web because it is no longer for sale by the company that owns the rights, the organization and the person who made it are dead. That climate model, (which incidentally has some real-time experimental evidence shown in that film, unlike any other model) appears to fit the observations better than the general slow AGW theory. The Hamaker hypothesis as it was first stated appears to have been an overestimate as far as the timing goes but in general, it appears to fit observations better. Do a search on "Devil's Hole Studies." You can find reference to research designed to find the most accurate timing of past ice age cycles. It found that the ocean sediment timings are off by 17,000 years or so, about the extent of interglacials. Correlated with ice core studies, it suggests that peak CO2 concentrations immediately preceded rapid commencement of ice ages. I've got a citation from a climate scientist that relates the other research, basically coral deposits and past ocean levels, that corroborates the Devil's Hole study I'll see if I can post here soon too. Another study that has been removed from NOAA's web pages related on how the ocean sediment timing was adjusted to fit the Milankovich theory then used to support that theory, purely debased anti-science. Adding in the data on those noctilucent clouds seems to cinch the Hamaker hypothesis. First surface mirrors being created by greenhouse gases, mainly methane apparently, at a height above a vast majority of greenhouse gases (50 miles, the highest clouds) could very well negate any heat trapped by those gases. I mean, if you cut down on the total amount coming into the greenhouse trap, you are going to result in a net decrease in temperatures.
The problem with the Hamaker hypothesis is that it is even a more ardent anti-"Oilogarchy" premise than AGW. It is and has been actively suppressed. After a couple of years the Devil's Hole studies were hit with a barrage of propaganda fossil fuel interest funded studies that reasserted the Milankovich theory which does not hold fossil fuel interests as complicit in climate change at all. A web site that used to have the books and data on the Hamaker hypothesis has gone towards being politically correct and has pulled much of that data, www.remineralize.org .
Tell me something, has a majority of scientists, official organizations and the general populace ever been massively mistaken before?