Print

Print


Indeed! 

> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:10:40 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] CIfA Conference 2015 B.A.G - Call for Papers - Our Past, its Future - The Built Environment in a Changing World
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> Better not feed the trolls after all.
> 
> On 29 October 2014 09:34, Michael <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > On 29/10/2014 11:00, Edward James wrote:%
> >
> >> Dear all, The CIfA's Buildings Archaeology Group is running...
> >>
> >> Recent volatile and extreme weather
> >>
> > How can you just repeat things that are simply wrong.
> >
> > */"A /**/new paper authored by Reinhard Böhm <http://resources.metapress.
> > com/pdf-preview.axd?code=l446053m40t06j43&size=largest>/**/of the
> > /**//Austrian Central Administration For Meteorology/ <
> > http://www.zamg.ac.at/aktuell/index.php?seite=1&
> > artikel=ZAMG_2012-05-22GMT08:15>/**/(ZAMG) refutes the notion that
> > anthropogenic warming is causing an increase of climate extremes and making
> > weather more variable and extreme./*/*"**
> > *
> > /(source: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/27/another-paper-
> > shows-that-severe-weatherextreme-weather-has-no-trend-related-to-global-
> > warming/)
> >
> > */Bouziotas et al. presented a paper at the EGU a few weeks ago (PDF) and
> > concluded:/**//**/Analysis of trends and of aggregated time series on
> > climatic (30-year) scale does not indicate consistent trends worldwide.
> > Despite common perception, in general, the detected trends are more
> > negative (less intense floods in most recent years) than positive.
> > Similarly, Svensson et al. (2005) and Di Baldassarre et al. (2010) did not
> > find systematical change neither in flood increasing or decreasing numbers
> > nor change in flood magnitudes in their analysis./*/
> > /
> > (See:http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/19/why-it-seems-
> > that-severe-weather-is-getting-worse-when-the-data-
> > shows-otherwise-a-historical-perspective/)
> >
> > For a list of extreme weather and the actual trends see: please see:
> > http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/climatic-
> > phenomena-pages/extreme-weather-page/44
> >
> > Cyclones - no trend
> > Hurricanes - no trend
> > US climate extreme index no trend
> > US Hurricanes - less frequent
> > Severe Australian Tropical cyclones no trend
> > US count of strong to violent Tornadoes (F3+) down
> > Worldwide precipitation - increased by about 1.9% per century
> > Snow extent no real trend (shown as positive)
> > etc.
> >
> > If anything the climate has been unusually static recently. In contrast to
> > the massive warming we see in the Central England Temperature record after
> > the colder 1690s when famine killed up to 1/4 of Scots, the climate
> > recently has been rather benign and there has been no net change in global
> > surface temperature in the last 18 years.
> >
> > Antarctic ice is increasing but yes Arctic ice has decreased (and polar
> > bears are thriving)
> > (but not much http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/),
> > Polar bear populations are increasing.
> >
> > What there has been is an awful lot of ridiculous non-science:
> >
> >  * On 20 Mar 2000 we were told "Children just aren't going to know what
> >    snow is," My son who was a young child then is now at University.
> >  * Met Office global forecasts too warm in 13 of last 14 years (BBC
> >    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/posts/Met-Office-
> > global-forecasts-too-warm-in-13-of-last-14-years)
> >  * Over 4.5 billion people could die from Global Warming related causes
> >    by 2012, as planet Earth accelarates [sic] into a greed-driven
> >    horrific catastrophe.
> >    (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/18/most-idiotic-
> > global-warming-headline-ever/)
> >    etc.
> >