| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" 09:56 - Nov 18 with 26030 views | sP7qupUf |
Is this a genuine attempt to address pressing issues or a smokescreen to detract away from the ongoing issues with the C-19 pandemic, emerging issues around cronyism and the potential disaster with the "oven ready" Brexit deal? The lack of detail would suggest the latter to my mind. |  | | |  |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:45 - Dec 10 with 1511 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 13:10 - Dec 10 by Scotia |
That sounds very much like you are trying to divert my attention from yourself? I'm not surprised you've said you "were out" about five times previously.
I only asked because you clearly spend a lot of time on these sites. Honestly, the quality of his "work" is so poor, probably worse than Mr Watts, as the accountant fella seems to do it himself. I very much doubt any serious environmentalist has bothered looking at his forum.
Edit - I seem to have found it. You clearly spend a lot of time trawling it and know how to use copy and paste? I particularly like his self incriminating thread "No Lizzie, Summer Rainfall Is Not Getting More Extreme" Where he posts (very cherry picked graphs) that actually show rainfall getting more extreme. The problem is he doesn't understand climate v weather and obviously neither do his readers. [Post edited 10 Dec 2020 13:26]
|
I don't need to divert attention from myself, you couldn't give one single satisfactory answer (except knowing about pairwise Homogenation) to any of my points.
Go ahead, tell him he is wrong, with data of course, which should be really funny considering you couldn't find any data to challenge a single thing I said.
I frequent about 20 Climate Forums every day and more than once a day for some of them.
I also frequent newspapers, to see how they are reporting and many other sites as well, including VBAX, Tech Guys where I contribute and Lichess where I play chess.
You actually had the nerve to say that he doesn't know the difference between Climate & Weather, which is exactly what the Met Office and the BBC show every single day. [Post edited 10 Dec 2020 14:48]
| | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 15:28 - Dec 10 with 1502 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:45 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
I don't need to divert attention from myself, you couldn't give one single satisfactory answer (except knowing about pairwise Homogenation) to any of my points.
Go ahead, tell him he is wrong, with data of course, which should be really funny considering you couldn't find any data to challenge a single thing I said.
I frequent about 20 Climate Forums every day and more than once a day for some of them.
I also frequent newspapers, to see how they are reporting and many other sites as well, including VBAX, Tech Guys where I contribute and Lichess where I play chess.
You actually had the nerve to say that he doesn't know the difference between Climate & Weather, which is exactly what the Met Office and the BBC show every single day. [Post edited 10 Dec 2020 14:48]
|
I don't need to give an answer when I can show that your point is incorrect in the first place. In fact in i don't know how many pages of debate the pattern is:-
1, You raise a point.
2, I explains why it is fundamentally wrong.
3, You find some cherry picked, misprepresented data.
4, see point 2.
5, You say "you can't provide data"
6, I say i don't need to (see 2 & 4)
Which is exactly what I've done to one of his blog articles within 30 seconds of looking at it, his (and his commenters) lack of knowledge regarding the difference beetween climate and weather is stark.
Take a look at the article title I mentioned . It's embarrasing.
Tight I'm off to watch the 15:30 climate forecast.
[Post edited 10 Dec 2020 15:39]
| | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 15:48 - Dec 10 with 1496 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 15:28 - Dec 10 by Scotia |
I don't need to give an answer when I can show that your point is incorrect in the first place. In fact in i don't know how many pages of debate the pattern is:-
1, You raise a point.
2, I explains why it is fundamentally wrong.
3, You find some cherry picked, misprepresented data.
4, see point 2.
5, You say "you can't provide data"
6, I say i don't need to (see 2 & 4)
Which is exactly what I've done to one of his blog articles within 30 seconds of looking at it, his (and his commenters) lack of knowledge regarding the difference beetween climate and weather is stark.
Take a look at the article title I mentioned . It's embarrasing.
Tight I'm off to watch the 15:30 climate forecast.
[Post edited 10 Dec 2020 15:39]
|
More waffle, it is all you do.
You are the one who said you would challenge, well get to it. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:23 - Dec 10 with 1487 views | Catullus |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 21:50 - Dec 9 by A_Fans_Dad |
Hands up all those that believe that big battery backup is getting cheaper.
Price for a 14 KWh Tesla Powerwall unit in 2017 was £5900 + Fitting
Price now £8000 + Fitting.
A 36% price increase.
Information courtesy of Paul Homewood, the guy scotia thinks doesn't know what he is talking about.
Except of course he took a snapshot of the Tesla Powerwall page back in 2017. |
It isn't cheaper right now but it will be cheaper one day, and more efficient too. Of course, if it turns out not to be the case then they'll stop using it and/or find a better way.
These kind of things don't happen without a lot of hard work, huge efforts. It inevitably pushes prices up at first before eventually, they start to drop. Most of the tech we take for granted these days was hugely expensive at first. Take mobile phones, they were army radios, a briefcase sized battery and a handset as big as an WW2 walkie talkie but now look at them. Handsets often smaller than tv remote controls and a battery1/100th the size that lasts most of the day on one charge. | |
| |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:47 - Dec 10 with 1482 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:23 - Dec 10 by Catullus |
It isn't cheaper right now but it will be cheaper one day, and more efficient too. Of course, if it turns out not to be the case then they'll stop using it and/or find a better way.
These kind of things don't happen without a lot of hard work, huge efforts. It inevitably pushes prices up at first before eventually, they start to drop. Most of the tech we take for granted these days was hugely expensive at first. Take mobile phones, they were army radios, a briefcase sized battery and a handset as big as an WW2 walkie talkie but now look at them. Handsets often smaller than tv remote controls and a battery1/100th the size that lasts most of the day on one charge. |
"they'll stop using it and/or find a better way"
Not needing them IS the better way. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:56 - Dec 10 with 1477 views | Catullus |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:47 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
"they'll stop using it and/or find a better way"
Not needing them IS the better way. |
Not needing them is purely your opinion though and it is very firmly a minority opinion. | |
| |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:08 - Dec 10 with 1468 views | Catullus |
90% of a tiny minority is just a smaller minority. What are you talking about there, hundreds of posts from a few dozen people.
You are in a tiny minority about this on here and this is as representative as any other internet forum. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:23 - Dec 10 with 1465 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:08 - Dec 10 by Catullus |
90% of a tiny minority is just a smaller minority. What are you talking about there, hundreds of posts from a few dozen people.
You are in a tiny minority about this on here and this is as representative as any other internet forum. |
Yes, I am a minority as there are a lot of Guardian readers on here, but I prefer to be in the minority than in the sheep, I always have. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:27 - Dec 10 with 1463 views | Catullus |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:23 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
Yes, I am a minority as there are a lot of Guardian readers on here, but I prefer to be in the minority than in the sheep, I always have. |
Guardian readers? A lot? Oh come on there's a few but there's a few express readers too.
Funny how it's Bojo's green deal but you're slating left wingers?
How do you know you're not a sheep? Quick update for you, unless you're in charge you're a sheep, we are pretty much all sheep on here. | |
| |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:57 - Dec 10 with 1459 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:27 - Dec 10 by Catullus |
Guardian readers? A lot? Oh come on there's a few but there's a few express readers too.
Funny how it's Bojo's green deal but you're slating left wingers?
How do you know you're not a sheep? Quick update for you, unless you're in charge you're a sheep, we are pretty much all sheep on here. |
I am an individual, I do not run with the herd and never have.
I do not want other people's approval.
You can call yourself a sheep if you want, but don't include me.
I make up my own mind by looking and learning, the consensus, especially where Science and Medicine are concerned have been proved wrong too many times to blindly accept it.
I base my "Guardian readers" comment on the number of people that quote it as if it is gospel.
As to Bojo's green revolution, it is the same as Liebours, Lib Dems and the Green Party.
It does not depend on any kind of "wing" as it is globalised and has taken on a life of it's own.
But you don't believe in all that conspiracy stuff. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 21:19 - Dec 10 with 1453 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:23 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
Yes, I am a minority as there are a lot of Guardian readers on here, but I prefer to be in the minority than in the sheep, I always have. |
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. You want to be in the minority, you want to believe. Despite the overwhelming evidence and the ease in which your posts can be discredited, across a range of subjects, you want to take the opposite point of view.
You've often claimed you have an open mind. It is obvious that is not the case. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 21:54 - Dec 10 with 1445 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 21:19 - Dec 10 by Scotia |
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. You want to be in the minority, you want to believe. Despite the overwhelming evidence and the ease in which your posts can be discredited, across a range of subjects, you want to take the opposite point of view.
You've often claimed you have an open mind. It is obvious that is not the case. |
You haven't managed to discredit one yet, nothing but waffle, but keep trying, I am sure you will some time. [Post edited 10 Dec 2020 21:57]
| | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 07:45 - Dec 11 with 1425 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 21:54 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
You haven't managed to discredit one yet, nothing but waffle, but keep trying, I am sure you will some time. [Post edited 10 Dec 2020 21:57]
|
Come on now that's just silly. You only have to look most recently at the Marohasy stuff, and purely because that is most the most recent of many.
Everything from HCQ to climate to weather. You discredit yourself frequently too by posting links that contradradict other posts or you take the entire article you link out of context.
This happens because you want to take the opposite view and pick individual articles that fit the narrative, but when these articles are considered holistically there is absolutely no consistency between them.
Funnily enough I had similar thoughts when I looked at Homewood's blog. Look at things objectively without deciding what you want to be told, his recent extreme rainfall article is a classic case in point. He's clearly misinterpreted data that is quite simple to use because he wants it to fit the narrative. Unfortunately it is absolutely clear that it doesn't. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 10:43 - Dec 11 with 1420 views | Catullus |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 19:57 - Dec 10 by A_Fans_Dad |
I am an individual, I do not run with the herd and never have.
I do not want other people's approval.
You can call yourself a sheep if you want, but don't include me.
I make up my own mind by looking and learning, the consensus, especially where Science and Medicine are concerned have been proved wrong too many times to blindly accept it.
I base my "Guardian readers" comment on the number of people that quote it as if it is gospel.
As to Bojo's green revolution, it is the same as Liebours, Lib Dems and the Green Party.
It does not depend on any kind of "wing" as it is globalised and has taken on a life of it's own.
But you don't believe in all that conspiracy stuff. |
So you make up your own mind by reading and taking information from websites you agree with, you follow their opinions....yeah, nothing sheep like there.
How many Guardian links pop up on here, there's at least as many from right wing outlets with the irony being that some posters, mostly those who went to the other board call this a right wing echo chamber.
I do believe in some conspiracy stuff, for example I believe that there are scientists being funded by corporate greed who are trying to convince people there is no climate change, no ecological damage, so that they can keep on pumping out their filth and making obscene profits.
Jeffrey Wigand and the tobacco industry, "The man who knew too much" now there was a genuince conspiracy!
There's also the lies told to us about diesel being cleaner when in fact it's more toxic than unleaded. | |
| |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:31 - Dec 11 with 1411 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 07:45 - Dec 11 by Scotia |
Come on now that's just silly. You only have to look most recently at the Marohasy stuff, and purely because that is most the most recent of many.
Everything from HCQ to climate to weather. You discredit yourself frequently too by posting links that contradradict other posts or you take the entire article you link out of context.
This happens because you want to take the opposite view and pick individual articles that fit the narrative, but when these articles are considered holistically there is absolutely no consistency between them.
Funnily enough I had similar thoughts when I looked at Homewood's blog. Look at things objectively without deciding what you want to be told, his recent extreme rainfall article is a classic case in point. He's clearly misinterpreted data that is quite simple to use because he wants it to fit the narrative. Unfortunately it is absolutely clear that it doesn't. |
Every single thing you have said there is the reverse of the truth.
You can only quote invested scientists that say Marohasy is wrong, because she and many others are critising their shoddy work.
HCQ works, as does Ivermectin, but it is too cheap, you don't get to be a billionaire promoting that as the 2 Vaccine manufacturers have.
You could not find one single piece of data about Temperature manipulation to contradict what I said, because you don't even know where or how to find it.
Like I said about Paul Homewood, you said you would challenge him and win.
I am still waiting, you can't because you have no clue as where to get the data to do so.
You just quote the original writer who got it wrong and keep repeating it.
In fact apart from the wrong data from Kew gardens which proved my point about Heathrow I haven't seen you post a single piece of data about anything other than your 2 pet projects.
You can't refute how useless Wind and Solar are, you can't refute how useless EVs are, or battery backup, you can't refute how useless air heat pumps are either.
In fact othe rthan repeating the propaganda position you have shown nothing but waffle and weasel words. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:45 - Dec 11 with 1402 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 10:43 - Dec 11 by Catullus |
So you make up your own mind by reading and taking information from websites you agree with, you follow their opinions....yeah, nothing sheep like there.
How many Guardian links pop up on here, there's at least as many from right wing outlets with the irony being that some posters, mostly those who went to the other board call this a right wing echo chamber.
I do believe in some conspiracy stuff, for example I believe that there are scientists being funded by corporate greed who are trying to convince people there is no climate change, no ecological damage, so that they can keep on pumping out their filth and making obscene profits.
Jeffrey Wigand and the tobacco industry, "The man who knew too much" now there was a genuince conspiracy!
There's also the lies told to us about diesel being cleaner when in fact it's more toxic than unleaded. |
You actually think I haven't looked at both sides of any of the issues that I have raised?
When I look at reports, papers and data and find the Scientists are flat out lying then no I don't go along with the Concesus according to the UN IPCC and all the others supporting them.
Do you even know what Climategate was?
You are not even prepared to look at the alternatives because the people putting forward the data have been condemned by the very scientists they are criticising, even when the data that they present is the "official" data.
Maybe it is because you couldn't understand it anyway, I don't know.
As to modern Diesels being more Toxic than Unleaded Petrol Engines, you obviously don't realise that the Exhaust from the latest diesels is catully cleaner the air going in to the intake.
You are accepting the propaganda again.
How about some science.
https://climatesciencenews.com/2017-07-21-diesel-engines-now-cleaner-for-the-env | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 15:15 - Dec 11 with 1401 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:31 - Dec 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
Every single thing you have said there is the reverse of the truth.
You can only quote invested scientists that say Marohasy is wrong, because she and many others are critising their shoddy work.
HCQ works, as does Ivermectin, but it is too cheap, you don't get to be a billionaire promoting that as the 2 Vaccine manufacturers have.
You could not find one single piece of data about Temperature manipulation to contradict what I said, because you don't even know where or how to find it.
Like I said about Paul Homewood, you said you would challenge him and win.
I am still waiting, you can't because you have no clue as where to get the data to do so.
You just quote the original writer who got it wrong and keep repeating it.
In fact apart from the wrong data from Kew gardens which proved my point about Heathrow I haven't seen you post a single piece of data about anything other than your 2 pet projects.
You can't refute how useless Wind and Solar are, you can't refute how useless EVs are, or battery backup, you can't refute how useless air heat pumps are either.
In fact othe rthan repeating the propaganda position you have shown nothing but waffle and weasel words. |
Come on stop digging.
I quoted the original scientist who undertook the reef work that Marohasy tried to disprove but had unfortunately she hadn't even visited the same type of reef let alone the same location. Therefore Marohasy's work is completely irrelevant.
You've posted several links that say HCQ doesn't work. Of course you didn't realise at the time until I pointed them it out to you. Trump, the HCQ poster boy, wasn't treated with it because it doesn't work. You've posted one link from a Gastroenterologist, that said Ivermectin worked, encouraging Dr's to prescribe via a loophole, and it was going to end the lockdown in Australia. Only for Australia to have another outbreak. They had another outbreak because Dr's knew he was talking utter twaddle so didn't prescribe it. The cost is just anti-vaxx conspiracy guff, the biggest life saving impact of the pandemic thus far has been made by "cheap as chips" steroids.
Temperature data has been corrected I've never disputed that. You've never demonstrated that it's been falsified because it hasn't been.
I don't need data to challenge either you or Paul Homewood. It's far quicker and easier to discredit yours / his. Have you seen this blog post?:-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/no-lizzie-summer-rainfa
I'd be interested in your thoughts?
The Heathrow / Kew issue is a non starter. I pointed out that a record temperature was also recorded at Kew. It won't be the same. Again your confused between weather and climate. Urban Heat Islands exist, but do not account for temperature increases associated with climate change.
Talking of which you never replied regarding the actual temperature recorded at Cambridge botanical garden - why don't you see what Homewood says about that?
Wind isn't useless when it's windy, Solar isn't useless during daylight and Hydro isn't useless after rain. EV's are a million miles from useless and getting better. We are making massive progress to make all of these technologies more efficient. Just look at Tesla?
Once again you posted one day last week that on a windless day we were still getting approximately 30% of our power from renewable's.
No propaganda, No waffle and no weasel words - you just don't like the message because you don't want to. Open your mind. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:30 - Dec 11 with 1393 views | Catullus |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 14:45 - Dec 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
You actually think I haven't looked at both sides of any of the issues that I have raised?
When I look at reports, papers and data and find the Scientists are flat out lying then no I don't go along with the Concesus according to the UN IPCC and all the others supporting them.
Do you even know what Climategate was?
You are not even prepared to look at the alternatives because the people putting forward the data have been condemned by the very scientists they are criticising, even when the data that they present is the "official" data.
Maybe it is because you couldn't understand it anyway, I don't know.
As to modern Diesels being more Toxic than Unleaded Petrol Engines, you obviously don't realise that the Exhaust from the latest diesels is catully cleaner the air going in to the intake.
You are accepting the propaganda again.
How about some science.
https://climatesciencenews.com/2017-07-21-diesel-engines-now-cleaner-for-the-env |
Oh come on, you can look at both sides of the argument but whichever side you choose to believe, you choose to follow, you are the sheep in that flocks cause.
Now diesels, look at all the data that was falsified, look at the scandal around certain car maunfacturers and remembern when we were first told diesels were cleaner, they weren't. There are a lot of old diesels on the road spewing out a lot of pollution.
Audi, Mercedes, VW, all had court cases which cost them a fortune, the WOL reportd that maybe 40,000 motorists in Wales would be due compensation.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volkswagen/92893/vw-emissions-scandal-vw-installed
You can call it propaganda but too others what you are supporting is propaganda. Again though you can't recognise that. To you the mainstream are telling lies, they are wrong, it seems to me, because they are the majority opinion.
Now this, "the people putting forward the data have been condemned by the very scientists they are criticising" surely you can see how obvious it is that the scientists being criticised will strike back, especially when they are being criticised by scientists they believe to be wildly wrong?
Can you see that's exactly the behaviour you are displaying?
One last thing, read this, https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/environment/2018/06/22/new-diesels-found-to-be-
It is clear that not every diesel model is cleaner and many still put out close to the same NOx as older models. | |
| |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:36 - Dec 11 with 1393 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 15:15 - Dec 11 by Scotia |
Come on stop digging.
I quoted the original scientist who undertook the reef work that Marohasy tried to disprove but had unfortunately she hadn't even visited the same type of reef let alone the same location. Therefore Marohasy's work is completely irrelevant.
You've posted several links that say HCQ doesn't work. Of course you didn't realise at the time until I pointed them it out to you. Trump, the HCQ poster boy, wasn't treated with it because it doesn't work. You've posted one link from a Gastroenterologist, that said Ivermectin worked, encouraging Dr's to prescribe via a loophole, and it was going to end the lockdown in Australia. Only for Australia to have another outbreak. They had another outbreak because Dr's knew he was talking utter twaddle so didn't prescribe it. The cost is just anti-vaxx conspiracy guff, the biggest life saving impact of the pandemic thus far has been made by "cheap as chips" steroids.
Temperature data has been corrected I've never disputed that. You've never demonstrated that it's been falsified because it hasn't been.
I don't need data to challenge either you or Paul Homewood. It's far quicker and easier to discredit yours / his. Have you seen this blog post?:-
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/no-lizzie-summer-rainfa
I'd be interested in your thoughts?
The Heathrow / Kew issue is a non starter. I pointed out that a record temperature was also recorded at Kew. It won't be the same. Again your confused between weather and climate. Urban Heat Islands exist, but do not account for temperature increases associated with climate change.
Talking of which you never replied regarding the actual temperature recorded at Cambridge botanical garden - why don't you see what Homewood says about that?
Wind isn't useless when it's windy, Solar isn't useless during daylight and Hydro isn't useless after rain. EV's are a million miles from useless and getting better. We are making massive progress to make all of these technologies more efficient. Just look at Tesla?
Once again you posted one day last week that on a windless day we were still getting approximately 30% of our power from renewable's.
No propaganda, No waffle and no weasel words - you just don't like the message because you don't want to. Open your mind. |
I am afraid you are lying yet again, it is getting to be quite a habit.
You not me stated that the 32.9% of our power was from Carbon free generation and I had to correct you, which you obviously ignored as you were convinced that if Fossil Fuels make up 67.1% the rest must be renewables, which of course is ridiculously wrong.
You forgot the Interconnectors, Nuclear (which I agree is good) and Biomass, which is not in any way "Carbon free".
The same applied to the 27th of November as well.
The trials that show HCQ didn't work as I have patiently explained to you many times are based on incorrect (dangerously too high) doses given at the wrong time without Zinc and without an Antibiotic. ie trials deliberately designed to fail.
But you just carry on repeating the the same crap time after time.
Don't take my word for Ivermectin, I suggest that to see just how effective Ivermectin is you look at the Prof's favourite Meta Data here.
https://ivmmeta.com/
As to Temperature data being incorrectly adjusted, you have no answers at all other than to keep repeating it has to be corrected.
You cannot offer any reason for not only making adjustments way in excess of the recommended amount but they also actually change the RAW data before they even start in with adjustments with their new and improved dataset.
You cannot challenge Paul Homewood and you won't beacuse you have no clue how to.
As to Lizzie, she as usual is the one cherry picking her data, not Homewood who looks at the whole historic records.
Heathrow /Kew, you were actually dumb enough to put forward a non Record Breaking temperature (see below) at Kew a whole 0.5C lower than the UHI site at Heathrow as proof that Heathrow's was a real record, bizarre.
Something very odd about the Kew temperature in 2015, you stated
Kew (gardens) 31/7/20 - 14:55 - 37.3 degrees
The oddity is that in 2003 Kew set the all time record of 38.1C according to RMET.
The Cambridge Botanical gardens temperature in 2019 was at a UHI compromised site due to new building works.
If you had done your homework you would have realised that.
You see Paul Homewood and others did do their homework to show the Google Map layout of the site.
I can give you a link to the analysis if you like, but you have never, ever said what the specs are for a top level site have you, not even when saying Watts doesn't know anything about the subject.
You obvioulsy belive it is OK to have building, paths, roads, car parks and Air conditioning units too close is OK.
You carry on believing that NON baseload Intermittent energy is a good thing even though it has wastde Billions of pounds and makes everybody's Electricity bills more expensive if you want, not me though. [Post edited 11 Dec 2020 17:13]
| | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 17:31 - Dec 11 with 1387 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 16:36 - Dec 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
I am afraid you are lying yet again, it is getting to be quite a habit.
You not me stated that the 32.9% of our power was from Carbon free generation and I had to correct you, which you obviously ignored as you were convinced that if Fossil Fuels make up 67.1% the rest must be renewables, which of course is ridiculously wrong.
You forgot the Interconnectors, Nuclear (which I agree is good) and Biomass, which is not in any way "Carbon free".
The same applied to the 27th of November as well.
The trials that show HCQ didn't work as I have patiently explained to you many times are based on incorrect (dangerously too high) doses given at the wrong time without Zinc and without an Antibiotic. ie trials deliberately designed to fail.
But you just carry on repeating the the same crap time after time.
Don't take my word for Ivermectin, I suggest that to see just how effective Ivermectin is you look at the Prof's favourite Meta Data here.
https://ivmmeta.com/
As to Temperature data being incorrectly adjusted, you have no answers at all other than to keep repeating it has to be corrected.
You cannot offer any reason for not only making adjustments way in excess of the recommended amount but they also actually change the RAW data before they even start in with adjustments with their new and improved dataset.
You cannot challenge Paul Homewood and you won't beacuse you have no clue how to.
As to Lizzie, she as usual is the one cherry picking her data, not Homewood who looks at the whole historic records.
Heathrow /Kew, you were actually dumb enough to put forward a non Record Breaking temperature (see below) at Kew a whole 0.5C lower than the UHI site at Heathrow as proof that Heathrow's was a real record, bizarre.
Something very odd about the Kew temperature in 2015, you stated
Kew (gardens) 31/7/20 - 14:55 - 37.3 degrees
The oddity is that in 2003 Kew set the all time record of 38.1C according to RMET.
The Cambridge Botanical gardens temperature in 2019 was at a UHI compromised site due to new building works.
If you had done your homework you would have realised that.
You see Paul Homewood and others did do their homework to show the Google Map layout of the site.
I can give you a link to the analysis if you like, but you have never, ever said what the specs are for a top level site have you, not even when saying Watts doesn't know anything about the subject.
You obvioulsy belive it is OK to have building, paths, roads, car parks and Air conditioning units too close is OK.
You carry on believing that NON baseload Intermittent energy is a good thing even though it has wastde Billions of pounds and makes everybody's Electricity bills more expensive if you want, not me though. [Post edited 11 Dec 2020 17:13]
|
Nuclear is carbon free.
Ok if it works why wasn't Trump treated with it?
I'm not taking your word on ivermectin, I'm taking the word of Drs who don't prescribe it in a global pandemic even though they could, are all Dr's on earth in on this conspiracy except one?
As I've said I'm not here to provide data or evidence just to dismantle yours. You prove that data has been incorrectly adjusted, the world over, not just the USA. It hasn't been but correction is essential.
I'm not wasting by time with Homewood his work is probably below GCSE level. So you really think he looks at whole historical records? Feel free to give an example, and how these match his claims. What data has Lizzie cherry picked that Homewood hasn't?
Dear me I mentioned Kew to show it was a record breaking day, I didn't expect it to be the same. As I've said records are for people who don't know the difference between weather and climate. Like yourself and Homewood.
I'm not describing a perfect site on here, who would care? Do you think I don't know what one looks like? I suspect I've visited more in a month than Homewood has in a lifetime. I have posted a link to the basic requirements previously. How many have you seen again?
Oh I have done my homework on the Homewood Cambridge site feel free to link it. It is worse than has usual standard.
I'm not saying it Cambridge is a perfect site very few are, it's why validation is necessary, but it's of a good enough standard to accurately record temperature and trends. UHI impacts are minimal. Guess what, the as near to perfect sites that do exist record exactly the same trends too. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 17:49 - Dec 11 with 1384 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 17:31 - Dec 11 by Scotia |
Nuclear is carbon free.
Ok if it works why wasn't Trump treated with it?
I'm not taking your word on ivermectin, I'm taking the word of Drs who don't prescribe it in a global pandemic even though they could, are all Dr's on earth in on this conspiracy except one?
As I've said I'm not here to provide data or evidence just to dismantle yours. You prove that data has been incorrectly adjusted, the world over, not just the USA. It hasn't been but correction is essential.
I'm not wasting by time with Homewood his work is probably below GCSE level. So you really think he looks at whole historical records? Feel free to give an example, and how these match his claims. What data has Lizzie cherry picked that Homewood hasn't?
Dear me I mentioned Kew to show it was a record breaking day, I didn't expect it to be the same. As I've said records are for people who don't know the difference between weather and climate. Like yourself and Homewood.
I'm not describing a perfect site on here, who would care? Do you think I don't know what one looks like? I suspect I've visited more in a month than Homewood has in a lifetime. I have posted a link to the basic requirements previously. How many have you seen again?
Oh I have done my homework on the Homewood Cambridge site feel free to link it. It is worse than has usual standard.
I'm not saying it Cambridge is a perfect site very few are, it's why validation is necessary, but it's of a good enough standard to accurately record temperature and trends. UHI impacts are minimal. Guess what, the as near to perfect sites that do exist record exactly the same trends too. |
Waffle and weasel words all the way through.
I called your bluff on Homewood and you failed big time.
What you really mean is that you CAN'T do any of it.
Enough, we have been here before, you are just full of cr@p with nothing to back up anything you say.
Just to be clear to anyone who bothers to read this, the Link I gave to Ivermectin is not "One" doctor as scotia just lied about, it is a link to Meta Data Studies of all the studies carried out worldwide. | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 18:11 - Dec 11 with 1379 views | Scotia |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 17:49 - Dec 11 by A_Fans_Dad |
Waffle and weasel words all the way through.
I called your bluff on Homewood and you failed big time.
What you really mean is that you CAN'T do any of it.
Enough, we have been here before, you are just full of cr@p with nothing to back up anything you say.
Just to be clear to anyone who bothers to read this, the Link I gave to Ivermectin is not "One" doctor as scotia just lied about, it is a link to Meta Data Studies of all the studies carried out worldwide. |
I've asked you direct questions no waffle or weasel words.
This is about the fifth time you've thrown in the towel and you think you've called my bluff on an accountant who doesn't understand graphs? | | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 18:42 - Dec 11 with 1376 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 18:11 - Dec 11 by Scotia |
I've asked you direct questions no waffle or weasel words.
This is about the fifth time you've thrown in the towel and you think you've called my bluff on an accountant who doesn't understand graphs? |
I have answered your direct questions with data that you refuse to accept, even though it is official data.
I ask you direct questions and all I get back is evasion, repeating the same things as if it makes it true, waffle and weasel words.
You have no data, you don't know where to find data unless it is printed in the BBC, the Gaurdian or nature magazine or some other Climate propaganda site.
You are clueless about official Raw data repositories, multiple adjustments and changing raw data. You know nothing about radiation transfer, thermodynamics, or how the climate is actually controlled.
It is pointless debating with you because you have no answers, nothing bu ad hominem attacks.
You don't even seem to know where or how we get our electricity, but make out you are an expert, which is spelt Ex Spurt in your case.
I am not going to waste any more time on you, you are just a wind up merchant. [Post edited 11 Dec 2020 18:52]
| | | |
| Johnson"s "Green Industrial Revolution" on 09:24 - Dec 29 with 1304 views | felixstowe_jack |
More than half of the UK power was generated by wind power on boxing day. The first time this has ever happened for a whole day. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
