Reference to the discussion forums on the Cambridge based website with URL www.thenakedscientists.com reveals that a significant percentage of the temperature measurement points, e.g. the Air Ministry Roof in Central London, are actually sited in the midst of Metropolitan/City 'Heat Islands', which over the past few decades have been consuming increasingly large amounts of energy (gas and electricity) to fuel the air conditioning/central heating systems, ever more powerful 2.5G, 3G, 4G (and soon 5G) mobile phone networks, TV and Radio Broadcasting DAB/FM networks, high speed lifts, computer/internet server farms, high availability, non-stop, high redundancy based telecommunications and stock exchange trading platforms etc. Consequently a significant proportion of the measured temperature rises are predominantly a reflection of this increased power demand and consequent increased heat dissipation into the surrounding atmospheric environments and NOT Aggregate Global Warming of the entire planet !


Members of the Naked Scientists, Cambridge based Forum, make the very valid point that we need to focus far more on data from the temperature measurement stations that are in the open countryside, on the coast lines and in the oceans, that are cleary NOT in the midst of 'modern, 21st Century, man made heat islands' before claiming that global warming is running away and is out of control. Just saying...! It would be helpful if Politicians World Wide would please consider and discuss these matters before making any more Knee Jerk Policy Decisions!  It would also be helpful if more Politicians had formal education/training in STEM based subjects, or appointed and listened more closely to their technical advisors, so that they could be far more discerning and questioning of the very powerful Corporate lobby groups who are currently 'calling all the shots' to suit their own selfish commercial/new technology product marketing agendas - intended to bully us all into buying into ever more 'high tech' stuff from them instead of, for example just 'getting out of our motor cars, and onto our bikes' and/or working mostly from locally based telecommunications/business hubs etc!

With lots of evidence.  Gathered over many years, from all around the world.

Indeed, and subjectively sifted for any evidence which doesn't fit their narrative no doubt.

It's always worth having a chat with the staff of the British Antarctic Survey. Who will point out that every year there is less ice at both* poles. They know this because they can see it. Unfortunately this is no longer subtle!


(Yes the BAS covers the Arctic as well.)

Yes, thank you gentlemen all, for your comments and data references. I am still open minded and open to evidence based persuasion, about just how much we can influence the climate by progressive de-carbonisation by 2035/2050 etc.


Many years ago, James Lovelock expounded that the earth is in fact a self regulating system and that, within reason, (but not including a global nuclear war or a direct hit by a massive asteroid), GAIA (aka Mother Earth) is able to cope and compensate for - in the mid to long term - a very wide range of climatic and oceanic variations, whether due to natural cycles that may be either synchronised with cyclic Sun Spot Activity and periodic Coronal Mass Ejections 's etc, every 11 and 33 years, or whether due to mankinds' now circa 7.7 Billion, (and growing), population's demands for electrical energy to fuel our ever sophisticated lifestyles - to keep up with the Jones's!


I am fully supportive of any measures to improve air quality in our towns and cities - especially if it actively discourages 1200 Kg + motor cars being driven by 80 Kg + 'singletons', whether BEV, Hybrid or ICE. However, the assumption that we cannot possibly survive or pursue worthwhile careers without using a motor car is clearly specious. I was personally involved in discussions with British Telecom, back in 1994, about how the new high speed, high data capacity, optical fibre networks were going to revolutionise our telecommunications infrastructure and that this rapidly emerging technology would make widespread commuting 'to work' of typically 10 to 50 miles each way each day, largely redundant. What ever happened to this brave new world vision? Instead of being 'gifted' with less stressful commuting, we seem to have been bullied by large corporations, into using most of the extra available network capacity to support our obsessive internet browsing, banking, on line shopping and social media habits on our ever more 'bandwidth hungry' smart phones. Just saying...:-(

In terms of the status of Antarctic and Arctic ice coverage, its always worth looking at the historical records. Tony Heller's video attached, is a good route to some of the main databases on this subject.  

Agenda drives much of the climate discussion, so if you want a more balanced view, its worth reverting to historical records and the raw data sets and doing some analysis yourself.  

www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWlBiih1p9Y

I read this comment on Climate Change on a motorsport forum. Quite an interesting view and I certainly agree with the final paragraph.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We can argue the existence, genesis, and magnitude of AGW/CC indefinitely, but the fact remains that a massive chunk of the planet is just being introduced to a consistent access to electricity for the first time, generally through the use of coal. They'll not be denied what we see as common conveniences on any grounds, nor should they. As for the world which is already in a more developed state, economic seppuku is not a reasonable, or even particularly effective, response w.r.t. any calamity, including climate.


Humans have a long history of sacrificing virgins to weather gods. Even if there were the possibility of securing virgins to sacrifice, the juice is not worth the squeeze. A complete collapse of Western society doesn't meaningfully change the projected outcome.


We're much better off working toward risk mitigation as opposed to the foolish notion that man, as a whole or individually, can meaningfully shift the planetary climate decades or even centuries into the future. The absurd compulsion to assign blame, and thus sanction, is as ineffective as it is unnecessary.


We're much better off addressing other issues that we actually can influence, like plastics in the ocean or particulate emissions. Problems which have actual answers are less captivating than hysteria over a relentless leviathan, but they are much more achievable in terms of potential success. Perhaps that explains the inaction."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://forums.autosport.com/topic/214097-the-climate-scientists-got-it-wrong/page-4


Best regards


Roger

It is interesting studying all the different ways people present their theories and beliefs on these various forums, and considering how we can all be deceived in various ways as if it is a human factors experiment.


We all have limited brain power and differing sets of underpinning knowledge and understandings, so we all have to be some what selective. Often we fall into the easy confirmation bias modes where we switch off our desire for further understanding and forget to query and test all the claims as to both veracity and validity.


For example my response https://www.quora.com/If-you-believe-climate-change-is-a-hoax-do-you-also-believe-that-coal-and-oil-energy-is-fine-and-poses-no-long-term-threat/answer/Paul-Noel-5/comment/127163144


Some suggest we can shrink the 100 year (roughly) time constant of the atmospheric CO2 into a quick YouTube video. So we have a speed up of one hundred fold to get to 1 year time constant, another factor of a hundred to get it to 3.6 days, then another factor of one hundred to get to 1 hour (That's a million!), and now we squeeze that into a do it yourself at home video of under a minute. We'd never want to accept that in any real engineering project - we'd test a little more!. We have had disasters were the tests haven't been well done, or have just been their to keep the financiers happy. With this level of precision the flat earthers believe them selves to be correct.


Insidious problems are insidious. Using the drunken man's light is a poor solution. take the illumination to the problem.