Climate Scientist Paul Burgess clashes with Meteorologist & Social Commentator Jim Dale over the statistics when it comes to climate change and whether human CO2 emissions are the primary driver of extreme adverse weather events like droughts, hurricanes, and heatwaves.
H/T Neil L
Burgess is one lying po…..
😉
As soon as you hear the words “climate scientist™”, you know the lies and misinformation will not be far away.
In this case it is Jim Dale who is off his rocker Burgess is aware of the past do we have another convert here?
Nana tried to coll it down with a diversion to a Gaza related protest
Yes , looks like I got the identities wrong… !
I saw the guy on the left sprouting “climate mantra and BS”, and jumped to the very logical conclusion that he was the “climate scientist”.
In this case, the rational one on the right was the climate scientist…
… rather amazing twist, hey 🙂
Ditto ….
the intro wasn’t clear enough for me to get them correct .
Guy on right was correct .
It was just wrong for Burgess to be labelled a “climate scientist™”..
… quite an insult really.
He is an Agricultural Scientist.. that deals with REAL science.
You both have it the wrong way around. The fraud is Meteorologist & Social Commentator Jim Dale. At least try to understand who is actually the villain of the piece. Try actually watching the clip.
I take it Dale is the brain-washed fool on the left.
Burgess seems to be rational data-based climate scientist… a rare thing indeed !
Dale gets his money from spouting out predictions of extreme weather to garner publicity for his own Weather Services business. His principal Meteorological qualification would seem to be that of a “weather observer” status he had with the RN in the early 80s.
He was good in the “Carry On” films though 😉
As I recall he usually played a dim but nice character.
I hear that Jim Dale is better informed on climate than the trougher they have on GB News.
1:28 point:
Jim Dale could not prove his accusation to be true if:
But his ‘out’ is that he got this accusation from others. It’s the major promulgators of this accusation who need to be put out in public, under severe penalty of committing perjury, and obligated to show the world what their ‘evidence’ is for the accusation.
“ Social Commentator “
ahhhhhh…… that explains his abject denial of facts and data pointed out by the guy on the right of our screen…
holy hell he is pointing out the things we have known for ages
POS…there I finished it for you. Paul Burgess is a Professor of Sustainable Agriculture and Agroforestry, Soil, Agrifood, and Biosciences. Where does his meteorology expertise come in?
It’s the guy on the left, Jim Dale that is apparently a weather guy, and makes money from forecasting extreme weather and making dire predictions.
Maybe I mixed up their identities. The guy on the left is an idiot climate scaremonger.
Good to know I wasn’t the only one to do so …
There do appear to be a lot of automatic, kneejerk reactions to the title of ‘climate scientist’ – I know there are more than a few of them that are nutjobs but not all of them!
We are going to hear a lot about the hot months we are seeing this year, caused by the eruption of an underwater volcano. The rise in temperature caused by the additional water in the upper atmosphere is not what the signature of CO2 heating would look like, yet it is going to be the argument used by the alarmists. Then when the temperature drops back to what it was before the eruption…..crickets. Cue 1998.
We’ll probably get a nice 15-20 year ‘pause’ into the late 2030s before the gradual upwards trend in this interglacial resumes.
Uh, Tommy, the Holocene Interglacial has been gradually cooling for the last few (5 or so) thousand years; the Neo-Glaciation, anybody? The recent Little Ice Age (ca about 1300 to 1850) was the coldest extended period over the entire Holocene. There was some concern in the 1960s and ’70s that we were falling back into a Little Ice Age-type climate regime.
Given the histories of past Interglacials when the Holocene ends it will end abruptly.
That’s assuming the natural warming will continue in the background.
We just don’t know if it will as we don’t know what’s causing it
That’s right.
“Upwards?” The long-term trend of the interglacial is a steady downwards trent into the next glaciation.
Probably longer. The AMO is due to move into its cool phase within a few years. It’s ~30 warm phase started between 1995-97. By the time it cycles back the effects of Hunga-Tonga eruption should be over and we will be heading towards solar cycle 25 minimum. This could lead to some serious (if you are an alarmist) cooling.
Another warming effect comes from ocean plastic pollution. I also expect to see more effort in controlling that pollution.
The Grand Solar Minimum that has started may bring on Little Ice Age-type conditions.
‘Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling’
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/
.
All historical interglacials (four that are documented with enough temporal precision) start off with a very fast warming, then drift off into a slower cooling that continues into, and throughout, the next glacial period. Modulated by random and/or cyclical variations. And the current interglacial is no exception. Your “warming trend” is most likely the superposition of the warming phase of a ±1,000 year cycle onto an overall cooling trend. With an assist from the ±60-year cycle we can see in the instrumental record.
It’s tempting to view changes in terms of recent human history, when they are no more than the blink of an eye in the span of earth history.
The asymmetry (rapid warming, slower cooling) is evident from ice-core palaeotemperature graphs. I suspect that long-term cooling is the “natural” state of climate in the present configuration of continents and oceans. But when sea level falls too low, the cooling mode can no longer be sustained, the NH icecaps start to melt, and a short but intense warming period starts another cycle. This is not to deny that modulation by orbital changes plays an important role too.
We have been in a neo glacial.decline for 3,000 years. (3Ka). Its getting cooler each warm 1Ka cycle. Interglacial optimum eded 3Ka BP. Now is at least a couple of degrees colder than the Egyptian/MInoan period, , over 100 papers reporting this back over the last 10Ka of 1Ka cycles of this Holocene period. Best to check the data before typing….here is some.
?dl=0
“caused by the eruption of an underwater volcano”
I don’t buy that for a second. I also don’t buy the “hottest on record” nonsense. Certainly wasn’t hot in the Pacific Northwest, therefore, not global.
Your PNW temperatures don’t control global temperatures either way. If there were a definition of global temperatures, it would be an average or something, and your dinky little corner of the surface is just a dinky part of the global data.
Please quote where I said PNW temperatures control global temperatures.
Averaging temperatures is a Bozo No-No. If it wasn’t hot everywhere, then it wasn’t global, it’s a pretty simple concept.
With 90% of the weather stations in the world in urban areas, the Urban Heat Island effect may be to blame.
What you “buy” has not much to do with what science measures, Suggest you research the science already measured. The Hunga Tonga eruption was relatively very large and inconveniently only 400 feet below the ocean surface. So a great deal of ocean and some surprised flash fried fish found their way to the stratosphere, faster than a speeding bullet,
From memory it punched through the troposphere to a height of 65,000 feet. NASA reckon there is about 10% more water vapour in the stratosphere than “since (satellite) records began” It will take afew years to drop out and is likely to have net warming effect.. But feel free to be like Jim, and not “buy” the facts we measure.
There is only one true science, and that’s the one anyone qualified to do the measurements can measure independently and repeatably, to test a definite theory. Deterministic science.
But You are spot on as regards considering short term events as significant in a global 30 years average. BUT what heppened where you live is also irrelevant. The climate mainly happens over the oceans, where all the surface heat (96%) is stored and the dominant control feedback comes from, by evaporation and its consequences, not the land where it isn’t and doesn’t.
Te absolvo.
I wouldn’t place the full effect of the warmth on the volcano. We also had the onset of El Nino and beginning of solar cycle 25 max sunspot activity. In addition, the reduction in Antarctic sea ice also has a warming influence.
What’s interesting is this “warmest year ever” was actually cooler than average for the first 6 months and then moved well above average. The period that was above average was also a period where CO2 concentrations were falling due to the seasonal cycle. Just the opposite of what one would expect if CO2 was the cause.
Guy on the right is quoting facts and showing data…
Guy on the left is sprouting mantra nonsense…..
That seems to be the standard left/right difference.. 😉
Bingo, that’s what I saw..
Good takeaway here….the guy with the graph WINS….always have a graph handy of world temperatures since 1850, NOT ANOMALY, if you want to win your AGW debate.
Anyone who uses the term “climate denier” is presumably a True Believer.
Mr. Halla: If I heard correctly, Mr. Dale referred to a “dictionary” definition of climate denier. Wonder which dictionary has been woked.
the best global warming talk ever is Nate Bargatze “The Tennessee Kid”.
The problem with “News” is that stuff is so very quickly forgotten – meaning charlatans like Jim Dale can effectively get away with spouting rubbish as he does in the clip from GBN. It wasn’t long ago the experts were telling us that UK was suffering from the effects of drought caused by CAGW. Even today the storm arriving from Eire is caused by CAGW.
The people saying this stuff are not just irresponsible liars they are doing a disservice to their viewing or listening public by not having regular proper supervised debates with fairplay to all on the subjects that alarm all of us – e.g. wokedom, cancel cultures, debanking, so called experts on gender, health (e.g. COVID-19, vaccines etc), climate (EVs, Wind and solar environmental damage etc), and people who regularly lie to whoever is listening about freedom of speech and who should have it.
It is time to listen to the millions who have been disenfranchised for what seems like decades but is certainly a very long tiime and shut the woke mob up for a couple of hours every day.
GB News looks about as professional as I thought it might.
A guy showing random charts of A4 paper, superimposed by live images of a completely unrelated riot!
I think the BBC and Sky News are safe enough, lol.
Oh dear, when unable to refute the message, attack the messenger.
GBnews is getting to be the most popular news station in the UK, and its audience figures are rising exponentially.
No accounting for taste.
Self assessment?
We have seen that your idea of taste… it comes from the far-left marxist sewer.
Either, he’s a robot or he’s an annoying activist from Twitter, likely with pronouns in his bio ;P.
Well it does sometimes make for a refreshing change to watch a channel that isn’t marching in lockstep with other media channels like some grotesque autocratic propaganda machine. That seems to be what the public are after – open and honest, not an opaque closed shop spouting the latest drivel.
Suggest you check the feedback to the You Tube versions of these interviews, and also the Twitter responses. Almost nobody likes Jim, even less actually comment on his Tweets or like them. Same on YOu TUbe. People are getting the message. They prefer the reality we can measure and see to the claims of alarmists that have not happens since the 2008 Act was passed into law. The only resukt has been a flat lined economy and massive increases in cost of iiving through taxes and subsidies on energy use throughout evry aspect of consumer and commercial activity.
GB News editorial take seems to be to get the biggest alarmist idiots on to debate people who they know the science and have the facts, and let the audience decide.
The Biased Broadcasting Company would never show any actual discussion of Climate Change, they merely promote CC propaganda.
The BBC is so safe it employed Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris. Amongst others.
And it is a friendly and welcoming place for Jews to work….er…..
Wrong as usual. Both BBC and Sky re losing audience to GBNews.
https://deadline.com/2023/05/bbc-news-channel-uk-audience-slumps-after-merger-1235361703/
I think what you, perhaps, meant to say was that a guy makes all sorts of assertions while producing no evidence whatsoever to support a single one of his assertions.
I’m not sure what the size of a piece of paper has to do with anything. On what size of paper does a graph have to be placed for it to be worthy of consideration?
But you are right about the BBC and Sky News: safe enough for people who don’t want to face facts.
So again, totally unable to counter a single thing that the guy on the right said.
All you can manage in pathetic whinging sounds. !
Mr. Nail: That’s all you got from it, and you think we’re surprised? Many here are fully aware that you cannot handle facts that deconstruct your pet hypothesis, so all you saw was the size of a piece of paper. Your opinions are solid if you only consider what Dale says.
I love the point about temperatures being 1.4 deg above pre-industrial levels. Given that pre industrial era was 200 years ago when the Earth was coming out of a several hundred year long “mini ice age”, I should very much hope that the temperature was rising.
That cherry was just so ripe and within easy reach, they couldn’t NOT pluck it.
Couldn’t pluck it. Double negative error. 😉 I do these sessions. The format does not allow for thr proper debate of the evidence, and the audience wouldn’t understand it is you did. It is a challenge, and something that may be on your notes does notget said. In part because the actiists make ridiculous claims to divert the argument away from the Elephant in te room. They are trained to do this, because they have no data that supports their position that will stand up to serious ce checks of the measured facts. Hence the appelas to authority and ad hominem attacks. When they do that, its obvious to a lot of the audience that they have no fact based answer, and you do, and can say where to go for it, they can’t.
I was gonna pile on you, but you are obviously not concentrating.
is not a double negative, it indicates the compulsion to actually pluck them low-hanging, but hard and sour fruits of wrath, see?
So, are you tired, tiddly or a drive-by shooter?
What a frigging mess. Belligerent angry magically thinking men throwing chaff, unread links, random authorities & insults at each other = trying to get laid by making out they they care more than one each other anyone else.
We’ve seen 30+ years of this childish tribalism and it’s only getting worse, more and more entrenched.
With regards UK weather right now: Some questions for the pair of self-important ‘experts’ that you are…..
Storm Debi – the 3rd in a sequence of storms (Babet 1st and Ciaran 2nd), roughly separated by a fortnight each
They all 3 of them followed the exact same path off the North Atlantic to land on the UK
Why did they follow that path
They all started as ‘waterbased dust devils’ or thunderstorms out in the Atlantic.
Why, (as above) are they attracted to the UK and why do they always strengthen as they do on their approach?
Timing
Is there possibly any significance in the time spacing of them e.g. The sun pushing heat into the waters around the UK?
Drought experts and concerning the rain presently falling out of Debi
Here’s your clue: What about all the mud those machines make and it then pours out into the waters surrounding the UK whenever even just a modest shower of rain falls?
There are more similar questions I might ask, let’s have some serious answers to those first.
And NO, I Do Not Want To Hear About last year last decade or last century.
Explain what is happening now, why it is happening and where. Do Some Real Climate.
Why exactly did Babet split into 3 and each part headed for the arable lands of Eastern Scotland, East Midlands and East Anglia.
Another bit off Babet ploughed into Western France where all the same (agricultural) things were happening. Is that REALLY just coincidence?
Those ‘eastern parts’ are The Lowest-Rainfall Places of the entire UK -so why did 3 storms in rapid succession arrive on those places exactly while the farmers had turned all their ground upside down?
Storms in the UK usually come from the South West. Anyone who has lived here more than 5 minutes will tell you it’s what storms do.
What differs year on year and storm to storm is where they make landfall. January 1968 Scotland, didn’t really touch the VIPs south of the Watford Gap. 1987 Michael Fish didn’t really affect Glasgow.
Some like 1953 are a bit different.
As the prevailing weather is from the South West that’s where most storms come from with most ending up in Norway
The water comes from the oceans where 98% of it is, over 71% of the planeray surface, and 4Km deep on average, most of the heat in the top 300m or so. And it evaporates when the temperature is above 0 degrees. The victorians worked that out. There are engineering tables showing how much there is in the air against temperature and relative humidity, science 101.
The land is largely irrelevant in the context of the UK and the size of weather systems like these, never mind the amount of water it picks up over the ocean, and comes,as you say, from the SW where it all is. Have you checked the Met Office’s annual rainfall figures? Last time I looked they were unexceptional over the last 100 years for the UK.
Do tell if I am wrong…….. and you have the supporting data reference..
I think you’re a different verse on the same Hymn sheet.
The majority of UK weather comes from the South West. That includes strongest winds and heaviest rain.
The weather systems are cyclonic so winds may well appear to come from a different direction when they do heat or cold can be brought in depending on what is where. The centre of a system can follow the same track of the previous five or go in a completely different direction and nobody knows why.
It’s about 1600km from the North of Shetland to the Scilly Isles with what used to be called “a deep depression” and is now a named Storm Berserker conditions can been very different at either. On the other hand a blocking high can extend well beyond the UK and North Sea. Named storms are not as extensive as blocking highs, which deserve naming I’d say
Is Jim Dale also employed as a stunt double for Liam Neeson?
I like the bit where Burgess shows some global data, Dale says you can’t rely on local data, Burgess replies that the data is global and Dale comes back to talk about some local event. Priceless. Dales favourite phrase is that we should join the dots, I’d reply to him to look at all the failed predictions over 40 years and go join the dots. Dale is usually the one-eyed man in the land of the blind but this time he’s showed his utter inadequacy with his catastrophising when up against somone with competence. .
One wonders if the Alarmists were born morons or if they become them over time.
I think it takes a certain personality.
A personality that lacks critical thinking skills.
I think it takes a certain personality.
A total lack thereof !
Look at people like Mann, Dessler.. most odious and arrogant cretins on the planet. !
All you have to do is point out to him that he uses FF every day and then he has no leg to stand on.
You still don’t get it. Their asses are burning, because YOU and I are FORCING them to use fossil fuels, because WE are cretinous creatures who just have no reasoning capacity, and WE just refuse to open up those secret vaults, where we hide those secret plans for those secret, suppressed organic shoes, vegan engines and climate-friendly atom bombs.
Once they get hold of that secret technology, our days are over….
By the way, Paul Burgess isn’t a “climate scientist” in the sense that most people here think. He isn’t a modeller. He is a practical scientist: https://www.cranfield.ac.uk/people/professor-paul-burgess-784015.
Yep, Burgess is a REAL scientist, doing REAL work, mostly in the field of Agricultural Science.
The occasional input into a paper with some “climate” related theme…
… Very down to Earth, you might say.. 😉
So very much NOT a self-styled hysterical AGW “climate scientist™”
A 2023 study says that depending on the surface temperature and solar irradiance datasets that one uses, one can show anything from mostly human-caused warming to mostly natural warming.
‘Challenges in the Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Surface Temperature Trends Since 1850’
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1674-4527/acf18e
The datasets are historical so there is not much that can be done about them.
oh, the naivety, it burns!
Ah… Jim Dale. Story tip here. In haste now. More to follow….
I have debated JIm a number of times on GB News, one below. He is an ex marine weather man promoting his weather business who understands didly about global climate, or the science, and simply picks short term extreme events du jour, mostly that others are promoting, to claim the usual alarmist oceans on fire nonsense. The double dam collapses of unmainatined and poorly built dams in Libya was his last extreme climate event. He is a kind of Bill Nye but nowhere near as smart.
He picks a couple of extreme events or hot months du jour before going on air to assert that extreme climate change due to human activity is real and obvious.
Same as the other know nowt charlatans , when challenged by solid data that addresses long term change and real historic climate from the proxy records from real authoriiies, that anyone can check and he never has, he claims support from authority denies that well known published science …….. some of it from the authorities he claims support his deceit. Denies IPCC on extremes, NASA satellite data, historic temperature records, and returns to mis representing the odd global extrene event as proof without any idea of what a 30 years average means. etc, Very predictable. If you check his hits on Twitter and comments on thse interviews i on You TUbe, almost m nobody likes what he says.
As you can see, I get a bit bored listening to his nonsense. He has nothing meaningful to say, when the facts appear before him he simply denies them and attacks the teller, and testates a few more extreme events.
……….. Coming soon, “Bob” Ward of the LSE/Grantham institute, backed by the same people as Carbon Brief, that they created to be their “scientific authority” that also make it up while claiming it’s science based. Hokey sticks ‘r uS.
Enjoy this one, list to follow. Give ne a score?
My mate Lois Perry also has a good go at Jim when she is on the programme, I’ll find some for you. I do background research for her if we know the subject in advance. Shame to take the money, although I don’t get paid……
..
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Crz9yblBTSM/
Finally someone is challenging these liars and cheats with actual observations. We need more.
GB News
Not what was promised…
Good God – Paul Burgess just comes out with all the usual hyperventilating climate propaganda it’s hard to know where to start. Meteorology is an actual science. Climate science seems to be political agitation and it is built on putting averages temperatures into computers to create models of where global average temperatures will be in decades hence. How is this a science?