These two links are written by physicists, not telly program producers, they help explain the physics behind the studies.

http://www.aps.org/policy/reports/po...gy/climate.cfm


http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newslet...afemeister.cfm

There are as many links for both sides, theres no point in posting them all. Seriously, there is no conclusive proof, just guesswork and theories. Some will believe on side, others wont - end!

Jo xxx

Had you bothered to open your mind a little you would have seen the physics actually written down as a formula.... There were words and numbers and letters and everything.... But no, you're right, much better to believe a self serving, self publicisising telly producer with an obvious agenda.

Like I keep saying, theres no proof, only hypothesis! I have an open mind and listen to both sides, each has experts, scientists and meteorologists. I then need to look at their sponsors and make a decision as to who I choose to believe in - and quite frankly, while there is a choice, then there is doubt!

Jo xx

Physics.... But no, you keep shaking your fist at the sun for shining too bright or the moon for leaving the sky for no reason....

How about Brian Cox?

http://youtu.be/1Cp5bEn_RPg

http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech...pinion-over-sc


Cox and Ince in this case.... Probably got an agenda though, vested interests....

Thought it wouldn't be long before someone started with the links

That's odd. How else do people back up their argument when everyone on this forum is such a cynical **** and so many can be so ignorant then Jacky? Pretty sure you've posted on or two links in the past to either back up your argument or show an example of something you're talking about so not sure why the sarcasm to be honest.

Yes but we have had all this before and every theory can be bust by people cleverer than most of us. Nothing the overfunded boffins say are going to make me think different. I believe in taking care of the world as far as possible. Climate change has now become a money spinning industry.

Politics, opinion, and belief are very different to science. And science is not "just theory". Science tests theory by experiment and accumulates actual data. And we should pay attention, not stick our heads in the sand. Excerpted from that very well-written Brian Cox article:

""The key to science is in this simple statement from the Nobel Prize-winning scientist Richard Feynman, who once remarked: “It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is – if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong.”...

...Climate scientists make measurements of observable properties of our planet, such as sea surface temperatures and the area of Arctic sea ice. Over many years, these measurements have formed a large data set. The only grounds for arguing with the data would be specific technical issues with the measurements themselves...

...It would certainly be wrong to assert that the ensemble of climate models from various research groups around the world encompassed all possible uncertainties about the future, but it is not logical to attack climate science as a whole, because to do so is to attack scientific method...

...Climate science is one of a series of areas that, for primarily non-scientific reasons, has become controversial; and these controversies risk undermining confidence in the very idea of science. Others are the use of genetically modified crops, vaccination policy and even (God help us) the teaching of evolution in schools. These socio-political-religious controversies risk damaging public confidence in science, partly because of the tactics employed by their advocates, which, if unchecked, will have grave consequences because we live in a society dominated by science. People who rail against science risk becoming disenfranchised, because many of the most important decisions we face as a society have a scientific component. And the larger and more vocal the disenfranchised minority, the less likely we are to make decisions based on the best available evidence and understanding...

It is not acceptable to see science as one among many acceptable “views”. Science is the only way we have of exploring nature, and nature exists outside of human structures."

It is not "only hypothesis" and it's not a matter of "belief" at all. Belief and science have nothing to do with each other.

What there is is a large amount of actual observed and measured fact - data - against which hypotheses are tested and found to be right or wrong.

Science, and how politicians, businesses and society choose to react to it, are not the same thing either.

Climate change (and the scale and accelerating speed of it is frightening, according to this article, more than two thirds of arctic summer ice has disappeared over the last 30 years) is going to do some parts of the world an enormous favour:-


http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...news:Position6

The Netherlands will be shit out of luck though.