Nevertheless it is quite a good link (ignoring the fact that it's about geology rather than climate science). It explains quite clearly how scientists working in an imprecise field have to continually use words like 'might' and 'could' when making predictions and how the public tend to misunderstand this and accuse them of getting it wrong all the time.

Like the geologists jailed for not predicting the Italian earthquake or Michael Fish not predicting a hurricane or climate scientists predicting rising sea levels they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

(BTW I do realise that Michael Fish was actually correct about the hurricane...)

See the zealots are jumping in with sweeping claims because of UK floods. The idiot Pickles on about global warming and another from the MET talking Climate Change. I then read that it is the worse weather since 1770......hello

Googled events in 1700's and the weather was crazy then. Wonder how they explain that

http://www.phenomena.org.uk/page29/page39/page39.html

Wondered when the links would start... (Have a guess who said that originally)

Praise be to Allah, we have rain, real genuine rain. the first proper shower in about eight months, must be water from all those melted icefields I presume.

The irony is that apparently the flooding - certainly in Somerset is actually nature almost reclaiming the land that was once swampland anyway - man pumped the water away - so its almost like nature is simply putting things back to where they should be - thats according to the BBC news!

Of course none of this has anything to do with over all climate change - thats a subject that is so much bigger than a few decades. In fact its man trying to change the land to suit himself thats the problem with the flooding in the UK.and the politicians are getting blamed and the silly squabbles begin lol

In the end, the climate will change. It always has!!!! So its pointless man trying to behave like King Canute or trying to blame anything other than nature!

Jo xx

Only a few posts ago you were saying there are no facts. Now you are stating facts - in fact you use the term 'in fact'. The problem is that once you quote facts you must be able to back them up.

There are plenty of facts which together are the basis of climate change theory and they are irrefutable.

AGW might or might not be a causal factor with the current flooding problems - we just don't know enough to be sure either way.

I see the Thames is over the top now.

The way things are going, we'd best all be nice to Mr Rajoy or there will be nowhere left to go.

Of course we could move further North and join the men in skirts before they close the border, but that's not really my cup of tea to be honest.

You either dont listen/read or dont understand. But for your edification:

The climate as always changed and always will - A FACT.

The question about AGW (altho we dont use the "Global Warming" tag anymore) is whether its caused by mans overproduction of CO2 - for that there are NO FACTS! Altho both sides of that argument can produce whatever you want them to, hence the pointless need of links

The current floods are caused by heavy rainfall and in the majority of cases are caused by mans attempt at claiming land, not maintaining the work necessary to keep it claimed and overbuilding. But on the whole, the current rain and winds are not significant in the grand scheme of the "Climate change" debate - its just more rain than usual!

Jo xxxx

Of course climate always changes over time, that is not in dispute. The question as you correctly say is whether or not human activities are modifying the natural course of events and this is difficult to determine.

The property of CO2 which in effect traps the sun's energy is a fact and it has been known for more than a century.

What is new is that human activities have increased massively in recent years and also that there has been a measured 25% increase in atmospheric CO2. It would be a brave person to assert that these two facts are mere coincidence.

These factors should cause an increase in the amount of heat energy in the atmosphere which in turn should cause modification of climate patterns.

Again it would be a brave person to assert that it is not happening.

Yes that's what I was trying to point out with the link to flooding disasters in 1770. Freak weather happened then, before the Industrial Revolution.

My link was to weather incidents not some Scientists dodgy figures

So why did the UK and Europe have serious floods in the 18th century

An interesting link - not for any other reason that it happened and its part of history - and yes, no blame on humans and their CO2 footprint lol!!!!

Jo xxx

assertions are not facts and this is not proof of man causing climate change - its guess work and hypothesis. There are so many more other contributing factors going on in the world and the solar system that may or may not counteract, cause, effect, affect....... and they're all random - as the weather is too. An imprecise science!

An analogy would be predicting the winner of a horse race - you can study the form all you like, but in the end, you cant accurately and without doubt predict the winner

Jo xxx

Good, we agree on just about everything!

The only thing I would pick you up on is that I didn't say that that it was proof of man causing climate change - far from it. Climate change is one of those fields where there will never be cast-iron proof.

My position is that I understand the theories and I can see that human activities could cause climate change - in fact I'll go further and say that I think it's highly likely. I am no more certain than that.