"Children will never again see snow"

[STYRBJORN]

NONSENSE. A guess is made at random. A scientific prediction is based on probability. If you take the trouble to read the original, rather than the press versions, you will see error bars, probability ranges, and always the caveat "subject to further evidence."
And so you return to believing "scientists" paid by oil companies.

[Richard G.]

Originally Posted by STYRBJORN

If you take the trouble to read the original, rather than the press versions, you will see error bars, probability ranges, and always the caveat "subject to further evidence."

Agreed, educated guesswork, as I've said...

Originally Posted by STYRBJORN

And so you return to believing "scientists" paid by oil companies.

Actually, you haven't seen me side with one camp or the other on this thread, nor will you. I'm simply expressing my disdain for scientists who try to deceive us by their selective use of data and suppression of dissenters... all of course IMHO...

[Red Robin]

Wasn't it 'scientists' who once told people that planet Earth was flat?

We can intellectualise about future probabilities/possibilities forever and a day but what will be will be and it is far beyond our human control. The trouble is that human beings think, once again, that they can control it but it's rather more than a faint probability that they'll stuff it up or make matters worse. It doesn't really matter if human species disappear or whether our children see snow again or not. Actually, we could all end up buried by snow in another Ice Age.

[John_M]

Originally Posted by Red Robin

Wasn't it 'scientists' who once told people that planet Earth was flat?

We can intellectualise about future probabilities/possibilities forever and a day but what will be will be and it is far beyond our human control. The trouble is that human beings think, once again, that they can control it but it's rather more than a faint probability that they'll stuff it up or make matters worse. It doesn't really matter if human species disappear or whether our children see snow again or not. Actually, we could all end up buried by snow in another Ice Age.

No, it was the church, with their usual unerring accuracy.

[Red Robin]

Originally Posted by John_M

No, it was the church, with their usual unerring accuracy.

....Church, scientists: Both self-proclaimed experts of their era.

But thanks for confirming that detail, it is as I thought

[John_M]

I should have added a caveat to that post. Not all clerics believed the earth was flat, but the myth was perpetuated by the church.
There are still people today who believe, in spite of the evidence, that the earth is flat; their beliefs seem to be based mainly on religious grounds, but they are in the minority.

[STYRBJORN]

[quote=Brocakat;711186]

If we are going to start forcasting Global Warming , I think that the only decent records/data to try and read any trends from, would be from those
WeatherStations whichwould located in areas that are not subject to the SO MANY variations in weather systems that the U>K> recieves - let's choose those located in the middle of Large Land Masses , instead ?

And what with a decade itself being only such a small 'blip' in time, surely we can only begin to see any 'Developing' trends when we have data from a bog-minimum of a 50 year period.

The data are based on figures collected at stations all round the world, established by the British Met. Office and Admiralty in, as I recall, 1850, to forecast general climatic conditions to use in planning the convoys on which the Empire depended. 160 years of data is a pretty good baseline. Max/Min temp, Max/Min barometric pressure, Max/Min rainfall were recorded on a daily basis, and notes kept of conditions.

There are many more recording sites now of course, and satellite data are also fed in to the models, but the original data form the base.

[STYRBJORN]

Originally Posted by John_M

I should have added a caveat to that post. Not all clerics believed the earth was flat, but the myth was perpetuated by the church.
There are still people today who believe, in spite of the evidence, that the earth is flat; their beliefs seem to be based mainly on religious grounds, but they are in the minority.

Sorry, but this turns out not to be the case. Aristotle pointed out that the moon must be spherical, as it appeared circular viewed from any angle. From there to the concept of a spherical Earth was a small intellectual step. Eratosthenes measured the diameter of the Earth to within 10% of the correct figure.

I suspect thay there is confusion here with the geocentric model of the Solar System, in which the Sun and planets revolve around the Earth, the Ptolomaic system. This was adopted by the Christian Church at the Nicene Council of 370AD, because it fitted better with theology then the heliocentric model of Aristarchus. As JonnM states, once it became religious orthodoxy it was blasphemy to question it. Ask the shades of Copernicus, Bruno, and Galileo.

[sawire]

I read somewhere that Odin's pump is another factor to consider. It has failed to function completely several times in the past few years.

[Brocakat]

Odin had/has a pump ???
Please , if you could give us all a bit more info !