Greta has issues, she is probably gay.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:55pm:



A climate alarmist,

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:



Then perhaps you can answer Dna's conundrum. When they will find that piece of magic that will let them determine changes in extreme climate states.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:



No petal. What you need to do is research how to prove a negative. I didn't think even you were that daft.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:



Poor petal. Proves once again he knows nothing of science.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:



But at some point there needs to be observational proof. Remember about correlation not being causation?

Tell us about the increasing extreme climate events. 

Now read what the IPCC said in SR5 2019

"Floods

"There was low confidence due to limited evidence, however, that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of floods. WGII AR5 also concluded that there is no evidence that surface water and groundwater drought frequency has changed over the last few decades, although impacts of drought have increased mostly owing to increased water demand (Jiménez Cisneros et al., 2014)"

Drought

"The IPCC AR5 assessed that there was low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at the global scale, but that there was high confidence in observed trends in some regions of the world, including drought increases in the Mediterranean and West Africa and drought decreases in central North America and northwest Australia (Hartmann et al., 2013; Stocker et al., 2013). AR5 assessed that there was low confidence in the attribution of global changes in droughts and did not provide assessments for the attribution of regional changes in droughts (Bindoff et al., 2013a).

The recent literature does not suggest that the SREX and AR5 assessment of drought trends should be revised, except in the Mediterranean region. "

Cyclones

"Numerous studies leading up to and after AR5 have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy (Emanuel, 2005; Elsner et al., 2008; Knutson et al., 2010; Holland and Bruyère, 2014; Klotzbach and Landsea, 2015; Walsh et al., 2016). A theoretical physical basis for such a decrease to occur under global warming was recently provided by Kang and Elsner (2015). However, using a relatively short (20 year) and relatively homogeneous remotely sensed record, Klotzbach (2006) reported no significant trends in global cyclonic activity, consistent with more recent findings of Holland and Bruyère (2014). Such contradictions, in combination with the fact that the almost fourdecade-long period of remotely sensed observations remains relatively short to distinguish anthropogenically induced trends from decadal and multi-decadal variability, implies that there is only low confidencev regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades."

Precipitation

"Observed global changes in the water cycle, including precipitation, are more uncertain than observed changes in temperature (Hartmann et al., 2013; Stocker et al., 2013). There is high confidence that mean precipitation over the mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere has increased since 1951 (Hartmann et al., 2013). For other latitudinal zones, area-averaged long-term positive or negative trends have low confidence because of poor data quality, incomplete data or disagreement amongst available estimates (Hartmann et al., 2013). There is, in particular, low confidence regarding observed trends in precipitation in monsoon regions, according to the SREX report (Seneviratne et al., 2012) and AR5 (Hartmann et al., 2013), as well as more recent publications (Singh et al., 2014; Taylor et al., 2017; Bichet and Diedhiou, 2018; see Supplementary Material 3.SM.2)."

https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/chapter-3/

So basically NO increasing global scale extreme climate events.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:


Oh noes. Wanting me to prove something that seems to small to be measurable happening.

I will ask the question once again How much warming is natural, how much warming is AGW?

You keep telling me I don't know. Then you must.

philperth2010 wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 6:39pm:



ooh definitely over emotional. Just exactly what has she said that fills you with awe?

lee wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 7:31pm:


Get back under your bridge.

We appreciate her view - but I doubt it will change much - and it is, after all, only one view, and must be weighed for its value with all others.

Kids should be encouraged to speak their minds - mine always were - and they should be listened to and their views taken into account in the final reckoning.... but not obeyed.  There is a difference.

Got a young girl visiting tomorrow - she's from a baaaaaad environment and staying with the ex's daughter... my immediate response was it was good to see here away from that bastard environment... I get the feeling she would rather be with the ex's daughter.... can't say I blame her - but how far will her opinion go?

She's the ex's daughter's ex-husband's brother's kid.... and the ex's daughter's daughter will not stay with 'dad' and his 'family' - the Addams Family...

Notice is out - 'touch that girl and I'll put you in the ground!'....