I don't count any of Murdoch's papers as 'fair-dinkum' "news" papers because they don't print real news on serious topics but 70% of papers sold + channel 10 & Foxtel and you have a large media platform. Add Rinehart/Stokes to that and you have a monopoly.
I see with your single supposed example of bias you've missed out where Murdoch's own journalists went on strike because they couldn't stomach the anti-Gough bias or where only last year the Tele photo shopped the sitting Labor PM as a Nazi on the front page.
Hahaha! He also said that his company in the UK didn't hack phones or pay off police, and that it was just one rogue journalist, and that his appearance at Leveson was the most humble day of his life. Oh the hilarity.
The facts are that Carter & co removed the measured global warming signal from their data by taking the derivative (you know what doing that means right?) and then claimed that they proved there was no global-warming signal! It's not even subtle and it's academically dishonest.
Please provide details so we can have a look (& probably a laugh).
Well, much of what you wrote above seems to be unsupported personal opinion and assertions to me. Presumably in your world view, everyone who reads a Murdoch paper is a dill.
Not good enough
Define leftist in YOUR eyes not wikipedia.
Come on you claim you are smart enough you can do it.
Left wing is the radical, reforming or socialist section of a political party or system.
You have me a tad at a loss - you appear to state that somewhere I claimed I was smart enough to define the term "leftist". Where exactly have I ever made such a claim?
Cheers,
Renato
Ah, that bastion of truth, the Tele, and a personal opinion piece once again.
Why is it that so much of the anti-climate-change argument relies on straight-to-press (and usually Murdoch press) or straight-to-blog publications and far less on peer-reviewed scientific journals (standfast the gross mis-quotations and distortions of which this thread is proving to be a fine example)?
Left wing is the radical, reforming or socialist section of a political party or system.
You have me a tad at a loss - you appear to state that somewhere I claimed I was smart enough to define the term "leftist". Where exactly have I ever made such a claim?
Cheers,
Renato
I never said that, you distorted my words I said you claim to be smart"which seems to be a thing you do often in your so called posts.
I asked you to define left wing in this context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renato1
Sad to see the current bane of the ABC and left-wing media, anti-Catholicism, entering the discussion here.
Regards,
Renato
So I'll ask again, define left wing in that context highlighted for you to make sure you understand what the question is asked of you.
What is this so called left wing media and who is this left wing media?
Good grief Renato, the deep ocean is that below 700m, not 2000m in the IPCC figure I quoted the figures from. Plenty of data from there, which is why we know the oceans are accumulating energy. Much less is known about the ocean below 2km, though some studies do indicate warming in places where 'deep water' like Antarctic Bottom Water (no sniggering at the back) is formed.
Not surprisingly, you chose to ignore the 700-2000m warming, which forms the core of Levitus' study, and provides the great bulk of continued ocean (and thus global) energy gain since 2000, as described by the IPCC.
But do please continue your unsupported allegations that the IPCC make stuff up, while you muster references from the climate denial organisation the GWPF... Can't you actually directly quote any peer- reviewed evidence?
I never said that, you distorted my words I said you claim to be smart"which seems to be a thing you do often in your so called posts.
I asked you to define left wing in this context.
So I'll ask again, define left wing in that context highlighted for you to make sure you understand what the question is asked of you.
What is this so called left wing media and who is this left wing media?
Again you make the assertion that somewhere I claimed that I am smart.
Please cite where I made any such a claim.
And I am utterly mystified with your question about the term "left wing" - it is a dictionary definition. It's like you are asking me to define what "beautiful" or "eyepiece" or "road" is. It has already been defined as part of the English language. Perhaps you should consult your dictionary on this point.
Regards,
Renato
Left wing is the radical, reforming or socialist section of a political party or system.
You have me a tad at a loss - you appear to state that somewhere I claimed I was smart enough to define the term "leftist". Where exactly have I ever made such a claim?
Cheers,
Renato
Again you make the assertion that somewhere I claimed that I am smart.
Please cite where I made any such a claim.
And I am utterly mystified with your question about the term "left wing" - it is a dictionary definition. It's like you are asking me to define what "beautiful" or "eyepiece" or "road" is. It has already been defined as part of the English language. Perhaps you should consult your dictionary on this point.
Regards,
Renato
Every post you make screams of you claiming you are cleverer than everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renato1
Sad to see the current bane of the ABC and left-wing media, anti-Catholicism, entering the discussion here.
Regards,
Renato
Gonna answer my question in context or not?
No dictionary meanings no wikipedia.
What is this left wing media? Who is the left wing media why are they left wing?
what is left wing according to you and how does it fit into your mindset? This may explain your mindset considering you show these traits when arguing your case.
Come on, chaps, settle down. Trying to link anti-catholicism to "left-wing" media and the ABC is a long bow, a bit of a distraction, and not really on the topic of climate change, or indeed of melting west Antarctic ice sheets. Oh, wait a minute, that was Renato making that claim! Whatever next?
I'd be interested to know which particular media outlets Renato considers "left-wing" and why? (My initial guess would be anything to the "left" of Renato, which sounds like a lot! )
Well, if I wipe off a $40,000 car without insurance, and am still alive, I'd be annoyed
But my question was "what if you are not alive"
This idea of people "hoping" its all going to be alright
is looking less and less likely, the longer it goes.
But its all irrelevant anyway.
The way population is exploding, bird flu ( or something like it ) will balance the ledger for a while.
Good grief Renato, the deep ocean is that below 700m, not 2000m in the IPCC figure I quoted the figures from. Plenty of data from there, which is why we know the oceans are accumulating energy. Much less is known about the ocean below 2km, though some studies do indicate warming in places where 'deep water' like Antarctic Bottom Water (no sniggering at the back) is formed.
Not surprisingly, you chose to ignore the 700-2000m warming, which forms the core of Levitus' study, and provides the great bulk of continued ocean (and thus global) energy gain since 2000, as described by the IPCC.
But do please continue your unsupported allegations that the IPCC make stuff up, while you muster references from the climate denial organisation the GWPF... Can't you actually directly quote any peer- reviewed evidence?
Hi Andy,
Darn climate scientists are sneaky. When Barry kindly gave me this link to a January 2014 article in Nature entitled "The Case of the Missing Heat", which details all the attempts to account for the missing heat by numerous people, http://www.nature.com/news/climate-c...g-heat-1.14525
who'd have thought that it was just a lark, probably designed to get more research funding?
Well, that would have to be the case would it not, since you claim that Levitus and the IPCC had the whole thing added up and solved way back in 2008?
As you are plainly unwilling to look at the references to the observed ECS that you asked for, I've done it for you.
Aldrin, M., M. Holden, P. Guttorp, R.B. Skeie, G. Myhre and T.K. Berntsen, 2012.Bayesian estimation of climate sensitivity based on a simple climate model fitted to observations of hemispheric temperatures and global ocean heat content.Environmetrics, 23: 253–271.
Otto, A., F. E. L. Otto, O. Boucher, J. Church, G. Hegerl, P. M. Forster, N. P. Gillett,J. Gregory, G. C. Johnson, R. Knutti, N. Lewis,U. Lohmann, J.Marotzke, G.Myhre,D. Shindell, B Stevens and M. R. Allen, 2013. Energy budget constraints onclimate response. Nature Geosci., 6: 415–416.
Ring, M.J., D. Lindner, E.F. Cross, and M.E. Schlesinger, 2012. Causes of the global warming observed since the 19th century. Atmos. Clim. Sci., 2: 401–415.
Lewis, N., 2013. An objective Bayesian, improved approach for applying optimal fingerprint techniques to estimate climate sensitivity. J. Clim., 26: 7414–7429.
"AUSTRALIA’S peak body of earth scientists has declared itself unable to publish a position statement on climate change due to the deep divisions within its membership on the issue.
After more than five years of debate and two false starts, Geological Society of Australia president Laurie Hutton said a statement on climate change was too difficult to achieve.
Mr Hutton said the issue “had the potential to be too divisive and would not serve the best interests of the society as a whole."…
GSA represents more than 2000 Australian earth scientists from academe, industry, government and research organisations…
The [GSA’s present] statement said: “Geological evidence clearly demonstrates that Earth’s climate system is inherently and naturally variable over timescales from decades to millions of years…
“The GSA makes no predictions or public policy recommendations for action on climate beyond the generally agreed need for prudent preparations in response to potential hazards, including climate change.”
Every post you make screams of you claiming you are cleverer than everyone else.
what is left wing according to you and how does it fit into your mindset? This may explain your mindset considering you show these traits when arguing your case.
The [GSA’s present] statement said: “Geological evidence clearly demonstrates that Earth’s climate system is inherently and naturally variable over timescales from decades to millions of years…
Ah Dah... I've been teaching that for years. The discussion is not whether the climate changes over time, its whether WE ARE DOING IT NOW of which there is ZERO, ZIPPO, NADDA debate....
Still haven't answered my question Renato, (look for the bit in RED), and my Concise Oxford disagrees with yours..., so there
I also note from your post "The GSA makes no predictions or public policy recommendations for action on climate beyond the generally agreed need for prudent preparations in response to potential hazards, including climate change.”
which is them saying, "better not risk it" I should think.
Every post you make screams of you claiming you are cleverer than everyone else.
Gonna answer my question in context or not?
No dictionary meanings no wikipedia.
What is this left wing media? Who is the left wing media why are they left wing?
what is left wing according to you and how does it fit into your mindset? This may explain your mindset considering you show these traits when arguing your case.
I see.
You are unable to support your claim, and you have no interest in dictionary definitions.
And you wish to discuss mindset with me?
Regards,
Renato
The [GSA’s present] statement said: “Geological evidence clearly demonstrates that Earth’s climate system is inherently and naturally variable over timescales from decades to millions of years…
Ah Dah... I've been teaching that for years. The discussion is not whether the climate changes over time, its whether WE ARE DOING IT NOW of which there is ZERO, ZIPPO, NADDA debate....
Still haven't answered my question Renato, (look for the bit in RED), and my Concise Oxford disagrees with yours..., so there
I also note from your post "The GSA makes no predictions or public policy recommendations for action on climate beyond the generally agreed need for prudent preparations in response to potential hazards, including climate change.”
which is them saying, "better not risk it" I should think.
I use the computer version of the Concise Oxford Dictionary.
Regards,
Renato
It's obvious that when you paint yourself into a corner all sense of intelligent discourse fails you. It's a pity because if you had just been honest in your answers rather than resort to dictionary meanings then it would not have come to this.
I take it all back you are not clever at all.
Pity.
