British Isles to be Desert!

Climate Zealot blocking traffic on Westminster Bridge, clearly not realising that traffic standing in jams are more polluting than free moving traffic; but no-one ever said these people were smart, or logical

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | UK ‘must plan’ for warmer future

The UK needs to plan now for a future that will be hotter and bring greater extremes of flood and drought, says Environment Secretary Hilary Benn.

Each time this type of thing is announced it seems that they have to go further and further with their madcap predictions. This is a Government report conducted by the Hadley Centre, which was created purely to look at Global Warming and is completely tax funded.

The Hadley Centre is part of the Met Office and accounts for approximately 13% of its staff, they are hardly going to start saying that Global Warming was a bit of a mix up and that mass redundancies are needed, now are they? No, with each report they have to go to crazier and crazier lengths to justify this cold spell and their very existence.

Bias

This bias is spreading into their projections, take the graph below:

Notice the dip sometime after the year 2000? Virtually right up to where we are now, and then the inexplicable jump later this year/early 2010?

The fact is this is pure guesswork, if not wishful thinking. Temperatures have dropped and there are no indications of any kind of increase looming.

They have covered their backs with large drops after 2010 and again after 2020, just in case there is no big increase, but after 2025 the guess work becomes quite fanciful.

The problem with these kind of models is that they are all based on a certainty that the temperature will always increase, and these enviro-mentalists don’t even consider the possibility that the warming period may be over.

Computer Modelling

Having a computer myself and being curious as to how this process works, I decided to create my own computer model. By feeding into my computer all the relevant information, dates, temperature and adding in pointless guesswork and bias, I set my computer to crunching the numbers.

Amazingly, and a testament to modern computing power, it finished the highly complex and completely random computing modelling pretty quickly. The result is below:

For some inexplicable reason my output was completely different to that created by the Hadley Centre, but then my very existence does not depend on the results.

As you can see the computer was able to predict that we are in fact heading for a mini-ice age. Reaching its peak around 2024, the surface air temperature in the Northern Hemisphere will drop by a third of a degree, which may not seem like much but to steal a phrase from the climate freaks, could well be catastrophic.

This is in direct contrast to the Hadley Centre’s predictions of an increase in temperature by nearly half a degree Celsius (they must  have had their graph upside down!).

Britain won’t have seem the kinds of temperatures like those in 2024 since the 1850s. We’ll be seeing frozen lakes, rivers and canals and perhaps a re-emergence of that popular pastime of ice skating on rivers and lakes. I for one, cannot wait.

The UK Met Office, which led the scientific analysis, says UKCP09 is the “most comprehensive set of probabilistic climate projections at the regional scale compiled anywhere in the world”.

Personally I don’t think that they are worth the paper that they are printed on.

Experimenter Effect

It is almost uncanny that model after model after model bears out the ‘scientists’ theories.

Scientists collated data from 400 variations of the climate computer model developed by the Hadley Centre, part of the Met Office.

I am guessing that if MPs were to create a computer model to discover whether they were giving taxpayers their moneys worth, the results would be pretty similar, i.e. the computer models would say that tax payers are getting a bargain!

Needless to say that the enviro-mentalists are clapping their hands in glee at this report.

“It’s great that the government has decided to put together such a scientifically robust analysis of the potential impacts of climate change in the UK,” said Keith Allott, head of climate change at WWF-UK.

But why wouldn’t they? After all this mean millions, if not billions, are going to be handed out in Government grants to Climate Change groups in order to prepare Britain for an event that will never happen.

By that time lots of people will have gotten rich from this cult.

Advertisements

6 responses to “British Isles to be Desert!

  1. Good Day to you Charlie, If the British Isles does indeed become a desert I can see a lot of recent immigrants celebrating the fact.

  2. Notice how Benn is using this to push for GM crops.
    While at the same time building 6000 houses on prime farm land.
    Optimum population trust warned in 2008 the UK could only support 27 million with food etc.
    Yet daily we have more coming in to swell the already crowded island.

    And Oh dear, the Australians are raining on their parade again!

    A stake through the heart…

    … of Anthropogenic Global Warming!

    Three Australian scientists (real ones!) just published a paper in the Journal of Geophysical Research (abstract) in which they show that oscillations of the climate in the Pacific Ocean explain most of the changes in global temperatures.

    The Climate Depot lays it out (emphasis mine – KV):

    The research, by Chris de Freitas, a climate scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, John McLean (Melbourne) and Bob Carter (James Cook University), finds that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key indicator of global atmospheric temperatures seven months later. As an additional influence, intermittent volcanic activity injects cooling aerosols into the atmosphere and produces significant cooling.

    “The surge in global temperatures since 1977 can be attributed to a 1976 climate shift in the Pacific Ocean that made warming El Niño conditions more likely than they were over the previous 30 years and cooling La Niña conditions less likely” says corresponding author de Freitas.

    “We have shown that internal global climate-system variability accounts for at least 80% of the observed global climate variation over the past half-century. It may even be more if the period of influence of major volcanoes can be more clearly identified and the corresponding data excluded from the analysis.”
    It will come as no surprise to many among our readership, that the warming of the last two to three decades of the last century has turned out to be natural. But it is of huge significance that what we ‘deniers’ think has now been corroborated by (and I can’t stress this enough) empirical science.

    No fiddled predictions from dodgy, incomplete models. Just a straightforward study of two sets of patterns in historical data and the relationship between the two. Today is the day that real, actual science drove a stake through the heart of AGW theory.

    Of course none of it will be on the evening news… Vested interests and multi-billion and even trillion dollar investments (pdf) have to be protected.

    http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/2009/07/stake-through-heart.html

    Raining again here!!

    • The government does everything that it can to stifle the farming industry, then says that we may not have enough food.

      What they should do, particularly as it has been proven to be no more nutritious, is stop organic farming. It is inefficient and wasteful, a luxury in times of plenty, and inexcusable when there is not enough food to go around.

      I agree about immigration, surely if we can sustain the current population, allowing more in is stupid?

  3. Troll-like kaleidoscope

    Do you have any idea how these conclusions are come about? All data published by the met office is open for peer-review. They cant just change the outcome based on what would save their jobs; someone would notice. Especially if the data didn’t match what every other scientist was finding. It does. Global warming is not going to stop any time soon, so get out your hole, and get your ideas together; before you get caught out.

  4. Troll-like kaleidoscope

    Organic food is not necessarily about nutrition. Organic food protects the environment, and your body from damaging pesticides. I agree, most of the time, solutions can be found to the pesticide problem, but organic food almost always tastes a lot better. In terms of nutrition, many studies have shown that organic dairy, and meat products are more nutritious than there non organic counterparts. On the vegetable side of things, organic shows little benefit, but almost never is the non-organic product found to be more nutritious.
    However, organic food isnt the problem; meat is. It takes a lot of land, and energy to raise a cow; a thousand fold what you get upon consumption. If we were to replace all cattle with vegetables, we would have enough food to feed the world population 6 times over. And, that’s just the cows. The only real solution to the food problem is to adopt a more vegetarian diet. It’s not nice, but necessary.

  5. Thanks for the comment, Troll-like Kaleidoscope.

    Do you have any idea how these conclusions are come about? All data published by the met office is open for peer-review.

    Er, that’s not entirely true now is it? The Met Office does not allow outside parties to view its data on global temperatures, data which stretches back decades and which is the same data on which they base their whole Global Warming Theory on.

    As far as I know, and I could be wrong, just seven scientists outside of the Met Office have been allowed access to the data. None of them were sceptics, indeed the Met Office have themselves said they don’t release the data in order to prevent its use in disproving their climate models! Surely if the evidence is so incontrovertible, they would allow the data to be accessed by all?

    The only other institution in the world that has comparable data is NASA.

    Also, not one of the climate prediction models that the Met Office, or anyone else, has released since the mid 1990s has been accurate, or anywhere near accurate. Yet the Met Office claims to be able to far better accurately predict global climate change, than local daily weather.

    Finally, it isn’t called Global Warming anymore, but Climate Change. Keep up. This is so that in the next five years, when temperatures worldwide have indisputably dropped, they can say that this is due to mankind irreparably damaging the earth’s climate system due to carbon emissions. In other words it will be become impossible to disprove the mad cap theory, as any change (and nothing is as changeable as the whether), will be down to Climate Change, ergo carbon emissions.

    If the name change doesn’t strike you as odd, wait for what happens in the next few years, when cooling is used as evidence of Global Warming Climate Change. It is you who should wake up before you are caught out.

Please feel free to add your own thoughts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s