September 2013 Open Thread

The thread, there is more.

Comments

  1. #1 Berendaneke
    September 15, 2013

    @86 Harvey eco clown and CO2 back hole :evil:

    You violate this blog with offensive unsubstantiated nutter bollocks which is so typical of the CO2 losers. Your insanely hostile wording cannot be accepted:

    When is Tim going to ban this guy, along with his puppet master, Luke and his alter ego Fatso? This blog has been dragged through the mud in recent months by the fruitcake brigade only because there has been no filter. You can see exactly what happens with blogs when deniers try and take over. Intellectual discourse is dragged down to the lowest common denominator. If these guys are a representative sample of the denial brain trust, then no wonder they are in such trouble

    You engage in non-scientific ranting of a desperate brat with foul language. You should take your meds and wipe your screen from your spittle, you eco clown :evil:

  2. #2 chek
    September 15, 2013

    You will see that you are totally unable to answer this simple question:

    No, Freddyfred. You’ve been unable to demonstrate the importance and show no comprehension of sampling.
    But keep on exposing your idiocy. If you have to.

  3. #3 Berendaneke
    September 15, 2013

    @chek (#2) clown :evil:

    Nobody has asked you, therefore close your foul mouth, twerp :evil:

    The question was addressed to Lionel A :evil:

  4. #4 BBD
    September 15, 2013

    Why does it matter?

    Once again, I have to ask you to develop your argument

    Please explain why you think the number of stations matters.

  5. #5 chek
    September 15, 2013

    The question was addressed to Lionel A

    So what, you utter imbecile?
    You’re participating in a public forum where your idiotic ideas are open season to any passing reader.

  6. #6 BBD
    September 15, 2013

    Let’s return to the data.

    Satellite data are not derived from thermometers on the ground. So when the satellite data are in close agreement with the surface data, what can we conclude about the reliability of the surface data?

    What?

  7. #7 BBD
    September 15, 2013

    Come on, what?

    Let’s have some sense out of your for once.

  8. #8 chek
    September 15, 2013

    Your #6 requires a certain degree of intelligence to make that crucial step, BBD.

    Freddyfred isn’t up to it.
    He’s got his delusions instead.

  9. #9 Luke
    September 15, 2013

    What drivel Jeff – there is no no need for a watermelon lefist concept such as ecosystem services – it simply used to be called natural resource management, biological control or conservation. It’s still done ! Ecosystem services are simply nouveau pretentious non-science rent-seeking crap and you know it.

  10. #10 chek
    September 15, 2013

    So say The Lukes, with no apparent expertise in anything other than clicking ‘submit comment’ for their drivel opinions.

  11. #11 BBD
    September 15, 2013

    And that is blatant trolling Luke, and you know it!!

    ;-)

  12. #12 el gordo
    September 15, 2013

    ‘Ecosystem services are simply nouveau pretentious non-science rent-seeking crap and you know it.’

    Hear Hear!

  13. #13 chek
    September 15, 2013

    Changing the title doesn’t change the role they play though does it, you self-congratulating morons?

  14. #14 Nick
    September 15, 2013

    #13 ….it’s like witchcraft: use the wrong incantation…and,pfft! We are talking to over-tired children…

  15. #15 Karen
    September 15, 2013

    ‘Ecosystem services are simply nouveau pretentious non-science rent-seeking crap and you know it.’

    hehe……….. yes, lip stick on a pig :)

  16. #16 BBD
    September 15, 2013

    Ecosystem services feed the people, Karen.

  17. #17 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    “Ecosystem services” builds on the quite elderly concept “natural capital”, a handle designed to help those who see the natural world as a mess in need of ‘improvement’ understand some basics about reality, and to demonstrate to the bread-heads that accounting laguage has broader utility. It helped to break down some of the anthropocentric delusions of exceptionalism and removal from nature that came with technology…well, it helped some.

  18. #18 el gordo
    September 16, 2013
  19. #19 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    There is early speculation that the 2013-14 European winter will be colder than the average …. that would make six winters in a row that have been particularly bitter.

    It feels like the game is up for the Warmista.

  20. #20 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #18…Farage is right that it’s been a tough decade in Europe for the poor, but it’s crocodile tears….’climate change is a sham because poor people’ is dumb,and as Barroso says, populist. He’s trying to argue against the scientific orthodoxy by pointing to the economic pain brought on by the globalism from which he personally profited… ghastly and stupid.

    The ignorance of holding up the Augusts 2012 and 2013 Arctic sea ice extent [which he thinks is an 'ice cap'] is lost on you, Gordy…why is inter-annual variability within the declining trend invisible to you?….favoring alleged ‘US scientists’ who predict 15-30 years cooling, while having no faith in projections, is a side-splitter. It’s of little comfort to know that you learn more here than Farage with his resources will allow himself. As a politician,he’s a troll,and we all know, we need better trolls.

  21. #21 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    The ‘scientific orthodoxy’ has been discredited.

  22. #22 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    # 21…has it? Just as a simple matter, in trying to suggest that Arctic sea ice is recovering simply by displaying two satellite pics,and appealing to unidentified alleged experts, Farage is demonstrating how NOT to discredit scientific orthodoxy. He makes a fool of himself,which no amount of polished mugging for the camera can conceal.

  23. #23 Stu 2
    September 16, 2013

    Lotharsson@# 2 & @#78.
    I can’t be bothered going through these threads to find specific quotes but:
    * what is chameleonic? I cannot find a definition of that word or what contextual application it has in your comment.
    * I am not disputing that MSM misrepresents issues. I would also agree that News Ltd are among the most strident. I do dispute that News Ltd are the only guilty party from whichever perspective you may have. I believe Nick’s view of PR in government institutions is somewhat naïve.
    * As much as I don’t think much of Luke’s commenting style from memory his main point was that ecosystem services is not a new concept it is just a new name for something that has been happening for quite some time. If I ignore his abuse, I actually agree with the substance of his comment as well as what he had to say about farmers’.
    * Go back to your comments around the time of the Australian election and it won’t be very hard to find politically motivated commentary from you &
    * I have decided that you are a crashing bore that can’t actually engage but can only browbeat, lecture, sneer and argue endlessly why even when you are mistaken you are in fact not mistaken.

  24. #24 Craig Thomas
    September 16, 2013

    You violate this blog with offensive unsubstantiated nutter bollocks which is so typical of the CO2 losers. Your insanely hostile wording cannot be accepted:

    Switzerland is famous for its Cherman-speaking psychiatrists – Freddy could provide them with plenty of material.

    You understand the psychological condition you are displaying above, Freddy?

  25. #25 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    ‘I would also agree that News Ltd are among the most strident. I do dispute that News Ltd are the only guilty party from whichever perspective you may have.’

    The Murdocracy has gone out of their way to present both sides of the CC debate, while Fairfax and the ABC have been negligent in this regard. That’s why I would enjoy seeing Aunty’s newsroom torn to pieces.

  26. #26 Stu 2
    September 16, 2013

    el gordo.
    I agree that the ABC has been remiss in its duty but I don’t think it is correct that any sector of the MSM has gone out of its way to present both sides of the CC debate.
    I think, instead, that they have all gone out of their way to polarise the CC debate and that does, very unfortunately, include the ABC.

  27. #27 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    # 25 “Murdochracy / both sides of the debate”… this is feeble. It is not a debate. It’s a shitstorm of lies disseminated by a faction which is not bound by any ethical or systemic guidelines of review.
    One ‘side’ has decades of work, inter-disciplinary support, the observations and all the physically realistic theory…the other ‘side’ has no work beyond disinformation, no physical consistency [GCRs, barycentrism, 'cycles', plots, hoaxes and conspiracies], no responsibility and a determination to lie [David Rose's 'emergency IPCC meeting' being but a recent example]…and Murdoch is delighted to exercise no discrimination between them. In fact Murdoch’s machine is a bona fide generator of disinformation in its own right [Rose, Leake, etc], a creator of conflict where there is none,and a disseminator of fake-charitable FF lobby pabulum [Andrew Montfords pathetic attempt to dismiss Cook et al]

    And robotic spammers like you put in for free. In the end, your ‘side’ are just chanting, ears stopped up, blindfolds in place.

  28. #28 Lotharsson
    September 16, 2013

    I do dispute that News Ltd are the only guilty party from whichever perspective you may have.

    So, you double down on a position that still looks remarkably like false balance and make no attempt to quantify the relative magnitude of any “guilt” you think is due. You’re happy to merely say “both sides do it”. Entirely as expected, perhaps because it would reveal you complaining loudly about the splinter and not saying much about the log.

    As much as I don’t think much of Luke’s commenting style from memory his main point was that ecosystem services is not a new concept it is just a new name for something that has been happening for quite some time.

    Epic Fail.

    I didn’t ask you to apply your previous position to whatever you interpret to be his “main position”. I asked you to apply it consistently to his actual dismissal of the field, you know, based on what he actually said to that effect:

    Jeff’s whiney bitch eco-end-of-the-fucking-world rantings are good entertainment value. They fulfill all the meme criteria to belong to the greenie, watermelon, university dropkick, do-gooder and bedwetter class…the last refuge for leftie eco-scoundrels…

    and

    …nouveau pretentious non-science rent-seeking crap…

    There’s no reasonable interpretation that says that’s merely complaining about a name change. A name change doesn’t provide a “refuge for eco-scoundrels”, nor does a name change render a scientific discipline “non-science” which means that the alleged “rent-seeking” is a scam.

    You are distinctly one-eyed, Stu 2, and you have a very interesting habit of applying your one eye to editing what other people have said.

    Go back to your comments around the time of the Australian election and it won’t be very hard to find politically motivated commentary from you

    Which does not support the claim that you made, you know, that I had dismissed competent scientists’ valid claims purely because of their politics. I’ll take that as an admission that your claim was false, since you clearly aren’t going to admit it yourself. You repeatedly misrepresent what I say, and simply duck and weave when you are caught out and pretend that you weren’t. Either you aren’t very good at comprehension, or you’re being mendacious. And you seem to think that no-one notices you being caught out.

    I have decided that you are a crashing bore that can’t actually engage but can only browbeat, lecture, sneer and argue endlessly why even when you are mistaken you are in fact not mistaken.

    What a desperate load of bollocks! Of course only a “crashing bore” would engage with what you say by responding to it, point by point if necessary. And I have no doubt it’s crashingly boring to have someone repeatedly point out that you’ve misrepresented what they are saying because you had really pinned your hopes on your straw men.

    Hope you stick the flounce this time.

  29. #29 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    you said….

    I said……

    you said….

    I said……

    you said….

    I said……

    lol

    “What a desperate load of bollocks! Of course only a “crashing bore” would engage with what you say by responding to it, point by point if necessary. And I have no doubt it’s crashingly boring to have someone repeatedly point out”

    you said….

    I said……

    you said….

    I said……

    you said….

    I said….. lol

  30. #30 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    ‘One ‘side’ has decades of work, inter-disciplinary support, the observations and all the physically realistic theory…’

    Yeah, but they got it wrong. All we want is equal time on the MSM to discuss alternative theories.

  31. #31 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    What they say:

    ‘There is medium confidence that this difference between models and observations is to a substantial degree caused by unpredictable climate variability, with possible contributions from inadequacies in the solar, volcanic, and aerosol forcings used by the models and, in some models, from too strong a response to increasing greenhouse-gas forcing.’

    What this means:

    The IPCC knows the pause is real, but has no idea what is causing it. It could be natural climate variability, the sun, volcanoes – and crucially, that the computers have been allowed to give too much weight to the effect carbon dioxide emissions (greenhouse gases) have on temperature change.

  32. #32 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    Loth needs a sub.

  33. #33 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    What they say:

    ‘Most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent, in contrast to the small increasing trend in observations… There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the small observed increase in Antarctic sea ice extent.’

    What this means:

    The models said Antarctic ice would decrease. It’s actually increased, and the IPCC doesn’t know why.

    What I say: lol

  34. #34 bill
    September 16, 2013

    What a hoot!

    Love the bit where the morons toss around the term ‘rent seeking’ – a Libertard Shibboleth of the era – without having a clue what it means. Please, genuises, explain to anyone who can be bothered listening to you how ‘ecosystem services’ can ‘rent-seek’? Oh, the irony…

    (Oh, and in the process you’ll only demonstrate you don’t know what ‘ecosystem services’ are, either, – not to mention that you’re too thick to Google – but that’s consistent. It’s a blessing – for you, at least – you’re both too stupid to realise how stupid you are. Anyone reading this who sympathises with you clowns is on notice that you, too, are equally dense. There’s a surplus of dense people in the world, and have a guess where they all line up on this debate…)

  35. #35 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    Hey el,
    did u just hear a farting noise ?

  36. #36 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #29, you said… nothing… as usual LOL

    #25, David Rose is asserting,not debating…and he asserts a falsehood: he claimed that the IPCC is ‘admitting’ that GW has been half the rate they said it was proceeding at in 2007. Not 0.2C/decade,but closer to 0.1C/decade,apparently….

    Trouble is, David is wrong. IPCC in 2007 said it had been warming at 0.13C/decade. Rose took their projection for the two decades post-2007 and confused it with their observations to 2007.

    Stupid? Liar? Stupid liar? Who cares? It’s not a debate.
    How quickly will his newspaper issue corrections? LOL

  37. #37 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    BBD,

    how many temperature stations are covered by the GHCN database? This is a simple question. You cannot escape the impression that you are utterly ignorant, stupid and incompetent :evil:

  38. #38 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    @36 wring, as always

    #25, David Rose is asserting,not debating…and he asserts a falsehood: he claimed that the IPCC is ‘admitting’ that GW has been half the rate they said it was proceeding at in 2007. Not 0.2C/decade,but closer to 0.1C/decade,apparently….

    Trouble is, David is wrong. IPCC in 2007 said it had been warming at 0.13C/decade. Rose took their projection for the two decades post-2007 and confused it with their observations to 2007.

    Stupid? Liar? Stupid liar? Who cares? It’s not a debate.
    How quickly will his newspaper issue corrections?

    David Rose is far more knwledgable in weather and climate than you CAGW fuckwits on leper island :evil: :evil:

  39. #39 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #31. On the contrary, the possible reasons for the pause have been laid out,the difficulty lies in attribution…and the impossible reasons have been dismissed.

    #33 Several mechanisms have been advanced over the last six years for the increase, and they will be part of the WG1 discussion. You are unaware of them? Too bad. How does the small observed increase affect the understanding of the whole,or the projections for GAT? In your own words,please. [ I know, it'll be 'lol' ] The modelling also underestimated the rate of Arctic sea ice decline. Are you always going to be this stupid about model/observation issues? I predict yes.

  40. #40 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    Nickie, I was almost converted until I seen this graphic,

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/14/article-2420783-1BD2956A000005DC-553_634x376.jpg

  41. #41 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    ‘did u just hear a farting noise ?’

    Yes, I assumed it was just the sound of dawn breaking somewhere.

  42. #42 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #38…”wring [sic] as always” …Assertion from the Strike Through Monkey…what a surprise! You’re gambling Rose is correct? Check Rose’s latest piece and check the relevant part of IPCC AR4 WG1 ‘The Physical Science Basis’…then acknowledge your mistake, cowardly sausage.

    Apparently, Rose has struck out his ‘emergency’ meeting claim, since he is slow ,it’ll take a few days for him to get across this one.

  43. #43 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS

    I have a new hypothesis (for CAGW leper islanders: not theory, a hypothesis, can you follow, leperers?)

    that Antarctic iceshields increase (as observed in nature now) by the follwing mechanism:

    New ocean water is entrapped by the very cold ice above the ice shield and freezes the water to ice

    et voilà

    there is MORE ice then and the ice shield has increased!!

    This is a very plausible explanation why Antarctic ice grows despite virtual CAGW!!!!

  44. #44 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    Berendaneke, the sausage fucks in here think that the heat from sea floor volcanism is the cause of the record breaking Antarctic ice

  45. #45 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    Or maybe it was that huge pile of polystyrene I burnt off last year ?

  46. #46 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    #43
    Berendaneke

    September 16, 2013
    +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS +++++ BREAKING NEWS

    Alternative hypothesis (for CAGW leper islanders: not theory, a hypothesis, can you follow, leperers?)

    that Antarctic iceshields increase (as observed in nature now) by the follwing mechanism:

    New ocean water is entrapped by the very cold ice above the ocean water at the bottom of the ice sheld and freezes the water to ice

    et voilà

    there is MORE ice then and the ice shield has increased!!

    This is a very plausible explanation why Antarctic ice grows despite virtual CAGW!!!!

    :evil: :evil:

    ANYBODY INTERESTED TO TEST THIS HYPOTHESIS?????

  47. #47 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    I agree Karen, its only West Antarctica feeling the underwater heat. Coincidence? I think not.

  48. #48 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    Karen, this (polystirene) appears very plausible too me.

    Please keep up your excellent work. The leper islanders need your help to get away from their illness.

  49. #49 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    I also have snow spewing out of my hot water system now? Is that Post Normal Climate syence causing that ?

  50. #50 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    el, you can get a KML file for google earth that shows recent earthquakes around the globe, have a bo peek next time a chunk of ice snaps off :)

  51. #51 Stu 2
    September 16, 2013

    Lotharsson.
    What a desperate load of bollocks?
    I am not desperate about anything and your latest effort @#28 has done nothing to alter my conclusion that you must indeed be a crashing bore.
    I also note that nowhere in your latest boring essay about nothing other than what you think you said/ I said/ you think you know what I meant by what I said/ did you even attempt to answer the only actual question I asked you.
    I also wasn’t aware that a question about another commenter would attract a pass or a fail mark, nor do I particularly care.

  52. #52 Jeff Harvey
    September 16, 2013

    “there is no no need for a watermelon lefist concept such as ecosystem services – it simply used to be called natural resource management, biological control or conservation”.

    Pure and utter nonsense from one of the blogs resident idiots. The term Ecosystem Services captures a suite of natural processes that emerge over variable spatial and temporal scales under a single umbrella – and highlight the fact that most do not carry pricing in economic price-cost scenarios. If Luke calls this, ‘natural resource management’, then he needs to explain this at the level of population and systems ecology. Until the term Ecosystem Services was invoked, the importance of biodiversity in maintaining and generating conditions that regulate nutrient cycles and various flows and feedback loops in natural ecosystems was rarely if ever acknowledged. Now it has become a vital part of understanding the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning – one of the major areas of contemporary research. Luke appears to think that the field is restricted to application, whereas it now combines both fundamental and applied aspects of environmental science and ecology.

    Note how the AGW deniers all jumped into the fray with their penny’s worth of stupidity. As I have said before, these people aren’t just AGW deniers but are anti-environmentalists. I’m sure that, like Fatso, they think that humans are virtually exempt from the laws of nature. They believe that no matter how much humans simplify natural systems, that technology will always enable us to out-run the damage inflicted.

    Debunking Luke’s asinine stupidity is a slam dunk. Still, the only reason I persist here is that some people may inadvertently wander into here and swallow the shit he and his brothers in ignorance dish out. Somebody has to counter it.

  53. #53 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #43-50 …it’s a congress of village idiots…round and round they go. Gurgle,gurgle,gobble
    for the sane,meanwhile

  54. #54 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    ‘Ecosystem services’ was coined at least 40 years ago, well before Luke was born.

  55. #55 adelady
    September 16, 2013

    it simply used to be called natural resource management, biological control or conservation

    Not exactly. The reverse in fact. These terms all carried or implied that “caring for the natural world” was a cost to the economy. A cost that many people claimed should either be reduced or eliminated as an unnecessary burden on “the productive economy”.

    The concept of ecosystem services turns this on its head. By expressing the values of natural processes in $$ terms it turns these previous arguments on their heads. Do we think it’s a good idea to blow up a perfectly serviceable sewage system that we built for a certain cost and that we’ll have to replace if we do so? No, it’s not. And the exact same argument can be used about things that we didn’t build ourselves but are available to us by virtue of geography and biology. So we now look at mangroves and wetlands in a very different way from how we did 20+ years ago. Very often we still drain and pave them or “reclaim” them for building, but at least the concept of ecosystem services gives us a language to discuss the actual costs and benefits of taking, or modifying or restricting, such actions.

  56. #56 bill
    September 16, 2013

    The three unwise monkeys can jabber on ’til the cows come home; the point is they have proved themselves, yet again, to be stupid.

    You do not know what ‘rent seeking’ is. You do not know what ‘ecosystem services’ are. Does this hinder any of you in your shamefully ignorant blatherings? Does it hell!

    You are uninformed blowhards who would much rather make it all up than do a moments research. Absolutely typical exemplars of your entire tribe, in other words.

    And all anyone has to do is scroll up and they’ll know it, dimwits!

    And all the Mouth-breather my-emotional -development-stopped-before-puberty ‘jokes’ fart in the world won’t save you!

    Because you’re the biggest jokes here…

  57. #57 rhwombat
    September 16, 2013

    #51:
    Nup. Can’t stick the flounce.
    Lotharsson: 279 vs Stu2: nil.
    But Little Miss Stu 2 will be back with more peeved tone trolling as soon as we get more than two pages away from the mess of his last tantrum, asking why we all read Lotharsson ’cause HE IS AS BORING AND RUDE AND ONE-SIDED AND UNFAIR -TO-RUPERT AND ILL-MANNERED AND IN-NO-WAY-AT-ALL-THE-REASON-WHY-DECENT-AND-INNOCENT-RIGHT-WING-ZEALOTS-CAN’T-MAKE-REASONABLE-AND-WELL-THOUGHT-THROUGH-COMMENTS-THAT-SHOULDN’T-BE-QUESTIONED-BY-SOME-OVERQUALIFIED-ANTI-ARTS-SCIENTIFIC-LITERATES-JUST-BECAUSE-THERE’S-NO-MODERATOR-ANY-MORE AND DID I MENTION BORING? And did he mention that Lotharsson’s reasonable and well expressed demolitions of his pretensions are worse than the Freddiot, Fatso, Spam, fLuke and Mr Hilter (and his friends Mr Bimmler and Mr Not-von-Ribbentropp), combined, because they aren’t psychotic, gormless, facile, rude or wrong enough? OK Stu2?

  58. #58 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    No need to shout wombat, I’m just down the road.

  59. #59 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    berenwanker

    Sick of asking you:

    Re: “how many stations?”

    Why does it matter?

    Once again, I have to ask you to develop your argument

    Please explain why you think the number of stations matters.

  60. #60 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    And “Karen”

    Ecosystem services feed the fucking people.

    I notice you skipped over that little fact without a blink.

    Lying scum that you are.

  61. #61 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    Tony Abbott has released his ministry line up: there is no science ministry as such….figures. Don’t like science? Ignore it, hide it inside another ministry, ‘problem’ solved. Science further removed from notice. I suppose it’s in the industry portfolio…or is he waiting for Mirabella to stumble over the line?

  62. #62 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Actually sorry he didn’t appoint Carter. The howls of derision from around the world would have been something to hear.

  63. #63 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    that Antarctic iceshields increase (as observed in nature now)

    What the fuck are you talking about?

    EAIS mass balance gain driven by precipitation (snow) which has increased as a predicted consequence of AGW.

    WAIS mass balance loss driven by basal melt/glacier flow rate. Rate of mass balance loss is increasing as predicted because of AGW.

    The latter is increasing *faster* than the former. The relationship will invert within a decade and Antarctica will become a net contributor to SLR.

    You have muddled up sea ice extent with ice sheet mass balance, you have confused the EAIS with the WAIS…

    Total pig’s breakfast. You are clueless.

  64. #64 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “Ecosystem services feed the fucking people.
    I notice you skipped over that little fact without a blink.
    Lying scum that you are.”

    Like I said bbd, tiz lip stick on a pig…

    eg. what you are saying, now we won’t get ‘farm fresh eggs’ !

    We will now be looking in the supamarket for ‘ecosystem services fresh eggs’ !

    you barbeque sausage fuck………….. lol…………..dickhead

    Tizz retards like Harvey trying to glorify their useless selves. shheeezzz

  65. #65 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    #63 BBD

    You really are a brain damaged chronic masturbator,

  66. #66 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    No, Karen. You are.

  67. #67 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Like I said bbd, tiz lip stick on a pig…

    Ecosystem services feed the people, Karen.

    It is obvious to the point of banality, of truism. Only a cretin like you would deny the obvious.

    Do you think food is synthesised in factories you stupid little shit?

  68. #68 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    What are chickens – even battery hens – fed on, fuckwit?

  69. #69 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    It was you bbd, that mentioned that Antarctica was insulated from warming via the circumpolar winds was it not ?

  70. #70 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Even Luke, who doesn’t know much, has picked up on the fact that the Hadley Cells are beginning to expand. Even he knows that this is going to screw up rainfall and so agricultural production in the temperate mid-latitudes and probably at higher latitudes. Drought is already starting to bite at US agricultural productivity. Already. By mid-century…

    But keep on lying, scum. Keep on lying.

  71. #71 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    Please sir, could I have some of those ‘ecosystem services fresh carrots, and how about some of those ‘ecosystem services fresh lamb chops’.

    fuck off idiot

  72. #72 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    It was me, Karen, that has tried to educate fuckwits like you about the fact that basal melt not surface air temperature, is the key modulator of glacial flow rates and so mass balance loss in Antarctica.

  73. #73 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #71 Now you are just making a screeching denial noise, Karen.

  74. #74 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Do you think food is synthesised in factories you stupid little shit?

  75. #75 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    #72 BBD You did not, I had already read about basal melt and wondered at the time, HOW OFTEN, over MILLIONS of YEARS, does this happen?

    You think it is a new phenomenon you dickhead

  76. #76 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    #74 BBD

    no doubt you eat soylent green…lol

  77. #77 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “While scientists and environmentalists have discussed ecosystem services for decades, these services were popularized and their definitions formalized by the United Nations 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), a four-year study involving more than 1,300 scientists worldwide.[1]

    This grouped ecosystem services into four broad categories:

    1/ provisioning, such as the production of food and water; = farming

    regulating, such as the control of climate and disease; = farming

    supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination; = farming

    and cultural, such as spiritual and recreational benefits. = retards like bbd, Lionel and Harvey all meditating and smoking gunja

  78. #78 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #75,76…the battery-hen of ignorance is failing to provide any service, let alone warrant provision of ecosystem services…basal melt is always happening [duh!], but rates vary [duh!]…what is influencing that rate now around the oceanic edges of the ice sheet, dummy?

  79. #79 adelady
    September 16, 2013

    HOW OFTEN, over MILLIONS of YEARS, does this happen?

    And this is relevant to our species which has existed in its current form for only a fraction of a million years …. exactly how?

  80. #80 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    #79 adelady

    Almost as dumb as your car analogy… lol

  81. #81 Luke
    September 16, 2013

    Rent seeking fucks would be better off watching my video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmabxQzkFrw

  82. #82 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    ‘The latter is increasing *faster* than the former. The relationship will invert within a decade and Antarctica will become a net contributor to SLR.’

    Highly doubtful.

  83. #83 el gordo
    September 16, 2013

    ‘Even Luke, who doesn’t know much, has picked up on the fact that the Hadley Cells are beginning to expand.’

    Its still only a hypothesis, but I would like to have a discussion on SAM, ENSO and STR to see if we can find the AGW signal in Oz.

  84. #84 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #82

    What the fuck would you know about it, Gordy? Do some reading you ignorant clown.

    # 83

    Hadley Cell expansion is observed. It is not a hypothesis. More flap-mouthed cluelessness from a fucking idiot who would do better to shut up and learn.

    Zhou et al. (2011).

    Johanson & Fu (2009).

  85. #85 Luke
    September 16, 2013

    El Gordo – good evening. Aren’t they a rowdy bunch. Anyway here’s a high brow blog – notice Figure 2 – http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2013/recent-slowdown/ Fucks here wouldn’t tell you such things.

  86. #86 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #84

    but I would like to have a discussion on SAM, ENSO and STR to see if we can find the AGW signal in Oz.

    What? It is incredible. Literally hard to believe. Just how far up your own arse will you burrow in your frantic retreat from reality?

    See your own BoM’s just-released Special Climate Statement:

    The recent record high temperatures come on the back of an exceptionally warm period for Australia, with above average mean temperatures affecting the entire nation. This warmth has culminated in Australia’s hottest 12-month period on record (Figure 2) with an anomaly of +1.11 °C. This is a record high temperature for any 12-month period (i.e., all January to December, February to January, etc.), with the year-to-date temperature with an anomaly of +1.13 °C (January to August) breaking the previous record (+1.05 °C in 2005).

    And:

    The last 12 months saw a large number of temperature records set across Australia, including:

    * Australia’s hottest summer day on record (7 January)

    * Australia’s warmest winter day on record (31 August)

    * Australia’s warmest month on record (January)

    * Australia’s warmest summer on record

    * Australia’s warmest January to August period on record

    * Australia’s warmest 12-month period on record

    There’s your AGW signal, you fucking marmoset.

  87. #87 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #85

    And you can fuck off too. Here’s Ed Hawkins, from your link:

    The Science Media Centre recently held a briefing for journalists on the recent slowdown in global surface temperature rise, and published an accompanying briefing note. The Met Office also released three reports on the topic.

    The key points were: (1) recent changes need to be put in longer term context & other climate indicators such as sea level, Arctic sea ice, snow cover, glacier melt etc are also important; (2) the explanation for recent slowdown is partly additional ocean heat uptake & partly negative trends in natural radiative forcing (due to solar changes and small volcanic eruptions) which slightly counteract the positive forcing from GHGs; (3) the quantification of the relative magnitude of these causes is still work in progress; (4) climate models simulate similar pauses.

    Read the fucking words.

  88. #88 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “The satellite data for the mid-troposphere for Australia- Land has just been released by the University of Alabama- Huntsville (UAH). Unfortunately analysis of this data shows that the mean temperature for the 12 months to August 2013 was +0.668 Celsius, which makes this period the sixth warmest of the satellite era (since December 1978).” http://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/australias-warmest-12-month-period-on-record-not/

    :)

  89. #89 Karen
    September 16, 2013
  90. #90 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #88, mid-troposphere is not surface,is it,chook….How many of us live at 5000 meters in this country? Or any country for that matter. Kens’ Clowndom is more like it. Sucked in,Kaz

  91. #91 Jeff Harvey
    September 16, 2013

    Karen,

    What the hell are you talking about? What have the processes in your link to do with farming????? You are as thick as a plank. All you illustrate here is the kindergarten level of understanding of science that I have to continually respond to. Your knowledge of the field is so utterly low that it defies a cogent response. What your post reveals is how totally and utterly stupid and uneducated you are.

    Here are your examples of farming:

    The production of food and water refers to wild types of plants and animals that are either harvested from nature or which have been cultivated and domesticated for human use. The fact is that these are ‘provided’ by nature; we would not have an agricultural base without them.

    Regulating, such as the control of climate and disease is based on the combined biological activities of billions of organisms that influence the gaseous composition of the atmosphere as well as deterring the spread of pathogens. In your simple brain this is farming? OMG, how dumb cna one be.

    Supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination. Nutrient cycles are again regulated by a stupendous array of soil organisms whereas we depend on insects to pollinate our crops. Both services are not ‘given’ – they are freely provided subsidies that emerge from natural ecosystems. We are studying pollinator declines in Europe and NA and the factors causing them, because without pollinators food production is in big trouble, as I discussed yesterday with the Oil Pam and Chinese examples. So where does farming enter into the biological activities of soil microbes and other invertebrates? Where does farming enter into the biology and ecology of insect pollinators aside from honey bees? What about native wild pollinators?

    Karen’s post would be utterly hilarious if she/it/he weren’t being serious. That’s the sad part. Karen is profoundly ignorant, but thinks her post was witty and smart.

  92. #92 Nick
    September 16, 2013

    #85,89, surrender your ecosystem services, you are a dead weight…and your library cards because you cannot read to help yourselves!

  93. #93 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    BBD leper clown :evil:

    As you always mix up “hypothesis” and “theory” you should try in OWN words to describe what you CAGW clown :evil: understand under these two terms (please not to weird wordings :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: )

  94. #94 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    so, you are ignoring bbd’s dumb comments jEfFeRy

  95. #95 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “How good are those surface records?

    The AWAP records from ground based thermometers are based on a method that still has not been made public. What we do know is that there were 700-800 sites (strange how the actual number so hard to state). As far as we can tell, less than half of those were operating in the 1930s and 1940s when we had our last major heat waves, and hardly any were measuring the temperatures of the hottest bits central Australia (see the black dots on the map). There are gaps of 1,000km between thermometers. Lewis and Karoly compare the latest heat wave to the average for 1910-1940, yet in 1910 there are only 16 thermometers covering 7.6 million square kilometers. Half a million square kilometers per thermometer?”

  96. #96 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Karen

    There’s *nothing* “dumb” about my comments. Nor have you ever – not once – pointed out an error in any of them.

    * * *

    Your spam about mid-trop UAH was abysmally stupid and embarrassing. All the more so as this has just been dealt with here. If you had read earlier comments on this thread about Christy’s lying with graphs properly you would be aware that the MSU MT data are contaminated by stratospheric readings and so biased cold.

    You really are just a clueless little tool, Karen.

  97. #97 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #95

    Straight-up evidence denial.

    Read the fucking words.

    Hottest 12 months on record.

    Records broken left, right and centre. Read. Denial is mental illness.

  98. #98 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #93

    Still refusing to develop your argument, Berenwanker?

    Why does the number of stations matter? Explain.

    And:

    – Satellite data are not derived from thermometers on the ground. So when the satellite data are in close agreement with the surface data, what can we conclude about the reliability of the surface data?

    Come on you lazy and stupid fucking troll. Do some work.

  99. #99 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “It is obvious that the CPC GHCN/CAMS t2m analysis produces a very different ranking of Australian historic summer heat. While 2013 was the hottest summer in the BoM heavily adjusted ACORN SAT data – the CPC GHCN/CAMS t2m analysis finds that 1983 was a clear winner for the hottest summer and 1973 missed out by only 0.00135°C.
    Here are the rankings of the top ten hot summers for each data set.”

    http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=2152

  100. #100 Karen
    September 16, 2013

    “Karen

    There’s *nothing* “dumb” about my comments”

    hahahahahahahaha,

    It was you bbd, that mentioned that Antarctica was insulated from warming via the circumpolar winds was it not ?

    #63 BBD
    EAIS mass balance gain driven by precipitation (snow) which has increased as a predicted consequence of AGW.

    retard :)

Current ye@r *