Re: Yesterdays Storms
 

I feel sorry for these people. Is this yet again a sign of global warming?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/n...re/4109692.stm

No, because 'Global Warming' is a fallacy.

It's a sign of abrupt atmospheric pressure changes.

Not good:(

which are becoming more common and more abrupt because of global warming

Id like to formally welcome George W bush to Scoobynet.

:D

I'd like to see some proof/evidence to support THAT statement. All of the scientific research states that Global Warming does not exist. The cyclic warming and cooling of the earth has been going on forever. It's neither accelerating nor decelerating and in fact, the arctic/antarctic ice regions are slowly growing at the moment.

Its a sign of an unstable moist air mass moving over the area. Only needs a bit of orographic uplift to start the Cu-nims forming with the accompanying rains and thunderstorms.

Les

ooh crikey - I genuinely don't have enough time for this, however to start with 'global warming' is a funny term, I prefer 'climate change', as this is what is likely to be observed - hence the storms - rather than localised warming per se.

yes, the world has warmed and cooled periodically for the 4.6 billion years its been around however there is fairly good evidence that the current observed warming (since about 1860 or so) has been linked to an increase in concentrations of CO2 and the other 5 GHGs in the atmosphere. These gases all cause radiative forcing i.e. they act a bit like a window, letting heat in but not letting it out again.

check out www.ipcc.ch and www.ukcip.org.uk for more details

if a climate change is occurring which we could slow or prevent, shouldn't we try?

also, the fact that the ice caps may be expanding could be a sign of warming - ever heard the phrase 'its too cold to snow'?

I with ya on this! The lentil munchers are getting far too much air time - only 20 years ago they were convinced we were heading for a man induced ice age. :rolleyes:

Yes I've heard of the "old wives tale" - go to the poles, either one. Coldest places on the planet - snows quite nicely there doesn't it?

which is one possible outcome if the gulf stream is switched off by a melting of ice currently stored on Greenland - hence the preference for climate change as a term, rather than global warming

LOL @ global warming :D

It is Summertime
We have some hot days
Towards end of hotness it thunders
When it thunders rain is often present
Rain causes floods
It flooded

Not nice for those with wet carpets - but a sign of global warming? Errrr no... My gran remembers thunder from her childhood days - it rained then too and sometimes there were floods...

And as you point out, the climate has been constantly changing since the planet first formed. Our records give us a snap shot of the last few microseconds if you consider the planet's life in terms of a 24 hours clock, personally I don't think that's long enough to draw and informed conclusions. Fine cut emissions because it is worth doing, but I don't go for unsubstantiated lentil munching scare tactics.

Sorry, Jap2Scrap, but that's total bull. Even those supporting your argument don;t say this. They say that some are growing. Which then gets distorted into statements like yours.

Spot on Abdabz. It's the start of summer, so there is less rain fall, therefore river levels are low. Following a hot day you get a thunderstorm that releases an unusually large amount of rain in a very short time. The river's can't absorb the water, so it runs off the top and creates a flash flood. Nothing unusual about that.

And if anyone uses the melodramatic phrase 'the river burst its banks' they'll get a slap :) It didn't, the river overflowed, causing a flood, simple really.

errr, if man made climate change is not happenning why bother cutting emissions?

If scientists cannot agree on this point, I very much doubt that we'll come to a factual based concensus on a car forum.

However don't let it stop you - it's cracking entertainment.

http://www.channel4.com/news/special...parasStartAt=1

Check the above. It was an interview with Bellamy and Monbiot about this on Channel 4 news. I saw it at the time. It's definitely worth watching. Bellamy (supporting the global warming doesn't exist argument) really looked stupid having taken his argument from some convicted fraudster who makes reference to a magazine article that doesn't even exist.

'Cos they're bad for your health? ;)

Wish i'd never bothered posting now! Thought a few people might have been interested that's all :Whatever_

The Green nutmunchers use the mythical spectre of 'climate change' as another stick to beat us with. This suits our current government as they can use these arguments as a justification for further taxing the motorist.

Every natural occurance such as the one that happened last night is now instantly reported to be the direct result of man made 'global wraming' caused by the CO2 emmisions of privately owned motor vehicles.

The Royal Society seems to disagree. And I think I'll trust them rather than any "experts" on scoobynet, thanks.

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/landing.asp?id=1278

"There is an international scientific consensus that increasing levels of man-made greenhouse gases are leading to global climate change. Possible consequences of climate change include rising temperatures, changing sea levels, changes to ocean circulation and impacts on the global weather system. These changes could have serious impacts on the worlds organisms and on the lives of millions of people, especially those living in areas vulnerable to extreme natural conditions such as flooding and drought. Find out more about the science of climate change and Royal Society policies on the measures needed for reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

You don't want to trust them. They are just another branch of the Government propaganda machine. Check their links and see where you end up!

Wrong - not leading to, accelerating maybe but definately not leading to. If climate change is not a natural process then WTF was the last ice age all about then? :rolleyes:

And the most revealing word in that paragraph - 'possible'

Possbile effects may therefore also include nothing actually happening beyond the natural fluctuations that this planet has been going through for the last 6 billion years!

Call me cynical, but any topic that governments latch onto in such a big way, makes me deeply suspicious!

Exactly.

Polution should be controlled, if for no other reason than it isn't good for our lungs - directly - but scaremongering by government led research teams is not the way to do it.

As others have said, 20 years ago we were heading for a new Ice Age.. What happened there then? Is 20 years long enough for a complete switch around?

And as for highlighting my previous post and saying that I needed to put the word "some" in for accuracy, I despair, I really do. Is there a special kind of ice that is formed as the temperature rises? There must be, for any ice to form as the climate increases in temperature.

Too cold to snow? What a stupid 'fact' to use in this discussion. As OllyK says, it snows just fine in the Antarctic.

Mind you we'll be ok as long as we don't walk under any ladders :rolleyes:

That was George Bush's Dad obviously.

Tree huggers know fcuk all about anything and because we've started building houses in flood plains all of a sudden Britain's sinking :cuckoo:

Don't dismiss 'too cold to snow' so readily. Although the ice caps are covered in the stuff, it has taken hundreds of thousands of years to accumulate. Antarctica is one of the driest places on the planet. Precipitation needs (relatively) warm air, so cold air is far too dry to support cloud formation, which precludes snow.

If the amount of snow in the Arctic and Antarctic is increasing, it is a sure sign of increased temperature. This is backed up by the break up of the ice shelfs, due to increased summer thawing.

More snow makes for more potential melt during the summer months, which means more fresh water released into the oceans, the results of which are not totally clear, but apart from the obvious rise in level will change the environment for sea life.

Just because a different view was taken 20 years ago does not make the current one incorrect. If you take that logic then you should dismiss much of current scientific thinking because it contradicts the classical view of the world!

Geezer

You are joking, right? This is what you said:

Jap2Scrap, that statement is not true - period. End of. It's nothing to do with pedantry.

That's a very good point to be fair. It's the same as smoking having no health related issues 50 years ago. We grow and learn.

But, if I let that one go ;) tell me how the ice-caps are growing at all if the temperature is increasing in the 'black and white' way we're told it is.