Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
Having just checked the 5-day (ha!) MO forecast, only to discover that tomorrow has now reverted to the sunny day predicted two days ago, but temporarily displaced yesterday by black rainclouds, I wonder if anyone publishes snapshots of the MO web pages. It would be a useful aid to keeping them honest, and I might have a go myself if I'm not re-inventing the wheel...
"Somebody should keep count of the number of recycling plant fires."
Indeed, Phil Bratby.
We have them in Australia all the time. One wonders, are recycling plants massive fire hazards, or are there issues concerning profitability and insurance policies, or perhaps both?
Somebody should keep count of the number of recycling plant fires. Llandow recycling plant fire
Is there a conference or something coming up this year?
Do not gamble.But let me entertain you with Slingo Bingo!
Rhyming?Or something more subtle reaching the public consciousness?
jamesp, It comes from the front page of the Indy.They are trying for their "Children won't know what snow is" blunder again because it gets then comedy hits and advertising revenue.
They are also whining about solar subsidies being cut... presumably because poor people are expected to serve their betters through paying fiat in Indy land.
Notably, they have abandoned Global Warming as predicted and now talk about Ocean Heat Content. This also abandons any of the feared feedbacks and thus tipping points. Thus their news story - if it were true - is a curiosity and in no way a report of anything dangerous.
And they ignore the fact that the records only go back one year until the point Karl et al reset the temperature record through dodgy adjustments to sea temp records.
Yes, they do ignore the satellites, of course.
Greensand, nice site +1
I caught a bit of R4 nause this morning about 2015 being the 'hottest evah' (a bit like the Heathrow record) and that this would put the pause (clenched teeth) to bed for good. Any truth in this, or is it just pre-Paris hype, again?
@ItDoesntAddUp said \\I think the little phase "up to" is missing from the BBC//Well The BBC's 'research' is usually what they read in the Guardianand it says " the amount of carbon released by the coal – were on average 40% lower than what is recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Researchers reached the figures by analysing coal supply data from 4,200 coal mines. The report uses updated energy consumption data.".. I wonder if somewhere along the line there's is not a maths error like they confuse Carbon mass with CO2 mass
oh I like this quote "While the US cut CO2 by 18% by boosting unemployment to record levels...... the Chinese cut CO2 by 15% by having a study published. Convenient!"
..ah oh since Germany and Poland also burn this low efficiency high water, brown coal ..I guess their CO2 emissions will suddenly be found to be lower than ASSUMED.
@Salopian : I did a quick check on Google , it doesn't seem like a big orchestrated campaign. Priddis doesn't seem to be a big FoE activist, or top caver, but rather a guy who has sent similarish letters in the past asking people to submit to Forest of Dean park authority on other non-fracking eco-matters.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.