Light Bulbs

[Silver_Shiney]

So the polar ice isn't melting then?

"CO2 theory failed claims Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman in an open letter to the IPPC, according to an article in the Express, 23 October 2014. Coleman writes: “The ocean is not rising significantly. The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number. Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing). I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid”.

He went on to say: “There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future. Efforts to prove the theory that carbon dioxide is a significant greenhouse gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed. There has been no warming over 18 years”.

William Happer, from Princeton University, agrees with Coleman and commented: “No chemical compound in the atmosphere has a worse reputation than CO2, thanks to the single-minded demonisation of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control and energy production. The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science”.

Carbon dioxide is a natural and essential part of the earth’s atmosphere that is used by plants, along with water and sunlight, to feed the world. Furthermore, the fossil record indicates it has been higher in the past than the current level, without the world being devastated by a runaway greenhouse effect." - John Mackay

The decrease in sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been highly publicised and used as evidence of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, down in the Southern Ocean the sea ice around Antarctica has actually been increasing, such that, according to Andrew Moutford, “across the globe, there are about one million square kilometres more sea ice than 35 years ago, which is when satellite measurements began”. Mountford went on to say: “We have only a few decades of data, and in climate terms this is probably too short to demonstrate that either the Antarctic increase or the Arctic decrease is anything other than natural variability”. Satellite data only goes back to 1979.

[Not so ancient mariner]

Well, even if your information is correct (which is debatable) Polar Bears do not live in Antarctica, do they?

See: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v8/n ... o2388.html

[Silver_Shiney]

Quite correct, polar bears don't live down south. However, the point remains that they are not in danger, their numbers are increasing. The iconic photo of a polar bear balanced precariously on a small chunk of ice gives the wrong impression that they are in imminent danger of drowning through lack of ice to stand on. They are strong swimmers.

Nice to see you are doubting the accuracy/validity of scientific research...

Re the link you gave:

Totten Glacier, the primary outlet of the Aurora Subglacial Basin, has the largest thinning rate in East Antarctica1, 2. Thinning may be driven by enhanced basal melting due to ocean processes3, modulated by polynya activity4, 5. Warm modified Circumpolar Deep Water, which has been linked to glacier retreat in West Antarctica6, has been observed in summer and winter on the nearby continental shelf beneath 400 to 500 m of cool Antarctic Surface Water7, 8. Here we derive the bathymetry of the sea floor in the region from gravity9 and magnetics10 data as well as ice-thickness measurements11. We identify entrances to the ice-shelf cavity below depths of 400 to 500 m that could allow intrusions of warm water ifthe vertical structure of inflow is similar to nearby observations. Radar sounding reveals a previously unknown inland trough that connects the main ice-shelf cavity to the ocean. If thinning trends continue, a larger water body over the trough couldpotentially allow more warm water into the cavity, which may, eventually, lead to destabilization of the low-lying region between Totten Glacier and the similarly deep glacier flowing into the Reynolds Trough. We estimate that at least 3.5 m of eustatic sea level potential drains through Totten Glacier, so coastal processes in this area could have global consequences

Nothing very scientific in it, lots of ifs and coulds.

[Mervyn and Trish]

So the polar ice isn't melting then?

On the latest observations, no, not even in the Arctic.

[Not so ancient mariner]

Observations by whom? One of these researchers? http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_30.htm


For a different view. see: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

[Silver_Shiney]

Clearly I'm missing something here. You seem to be criticising what I say and backing it up by pointing us to the same NSIDC website that I cited!!

[Not so ancient mariner]

Clearly I'm missing something here. You seem to be criticising what I say and backing it up by pointing us to the same NSIDC website that I cited!!

You mean you selectivelyquoted

Indeed it does say that:

After reaching its seasonal maximum on February 25, the beginning of the melt season was interrupted by late-season periods of ice growth, largely in the Bering Sea, Davis Strait and around Labrador. Near the end of March, extent rose to within about 83,000 square kilometers (32,000 square miles) of the February 25 value.

But it also goes on to say:

The monthly average Arctic sea ice extent for March was the lowest in the satellite record, and the rate of decline since 1979 represents 2.6% per decade.

With regard to Antarctica it records that:

Air temperatures reached record high levels at two Antarctic stations last week, setting a new mark for the warmest conditions ever measured anywhere on the continent. On March 23, at Argentina’s base Marambio, a temperature of 17.4° Celsius (63.3° Fahrenheit) was reached, surpassing a previous record set in 1961 at a nearby base, Esperanza. The old record was 17.1° Celsius (62.8° Fahrenheit). However, Esperanza quickly reclaimed the record a few hours later on March 24, reaching a temperature of 17.5° Celsius (63.5° Fahrenheit).

It is also a fact that virtually every glacier in the world is retreating as they start to melt more quickly


Just because John Coleman was a respected meteorologist in 1981 when he founded the weather channel, does not guarantee the same standards of interpretation in his work today. Until 1990 David Icke was a respected BBC sports broadcaster, and spokesman for the Green Party.

Incidentally the fact that polar bears are strong swimmers is irrelevant. They need the pack ice to enable them to hunt
seals, their prime source of food. Once in the water, seals are faster and more agile than any bear.

[Not so ancient mariner]

The polar bears were never in danger to start with, despite what Attenborough tells you.

Are you seriously suggesting you know more about Polar Bears and their habitat than David Attenborough - or that he is somehow in the pocket of those who peddle "the myth of global warming" for their own nefarious ends????

[Mervyn and Trish]

I think my point about why I keep my head down on this one is clear. The pro global warming scientists predictions have repeatedly not been fulfilled and their model revised to fit the facts. The impression is given they are right and the considerable number who argue differently are nuts. The reality is that the science is far from clear. But those who disagree with the (highly lucrative for governments and so-called green energy companies) dogma are treated little better than mediaeval witches. I will therefore put on my tin hat and withdraw to my cave, which is where we'll all be living in a few years time when the lights go out because we haven't been allowed to build the new power stations we desperately need.

[Silver_Shiney]

Notso, please remember that accurate recording of the ice only started in 1979, so there is only 36 years' worth of data to examine. This is insufficient to make the sort of "accurate" claims being made. The simple fact is that the climate has been changing since the Flood.

"Flexible foraging for Polar Bears" was reported in ScienceDaily 22 December 2013 and BMC Ecology 21 December 2013. Polar Bears are well known for going out on the sea ice to hunt ringed seal pups, but they still have to eat when there is no ice.

Scientists at the American Museum of Natural History have studied the feeding habits of polar bears in the western Hudson’s Bay region during the ice free periods, and found they are developing “flexible foraging strategies while on land, such as prey-switching and eating a mixed diet of plants and animals”. The researchers found the bears prey on snow geese and caribou, and also eat snow geese eggs. As part of their research the scientists examined the scats (droppings) of the bears and noted 84.9% of the scats contained at least one type of plant. The most common plants consumed were Lyme grass seed heads (Leymus arenarius), berries and marine algae (seaweed). The researchers concluded the bears were “foraging opportunistically in a manner consistent with maximizing intake while minimizing energy expenditure associated with movement”. The scientists also suggested the omnivorous diet had other benefits such as providing vitamins and minerals, diluting toxins and “assessing new foods for potential switching”. The researchers suggest polar bears are able to eat a mixed diet because they share a genetic heritage with brown bears. This research confirms what people who live with polar bears have known all along, i.e. polar bears are opportunistic feeders, and they will eat whatever is available.

I'm saying that Attenborough is known for not getting his facts right.

Merv, you are quite right about the ridicule heaped on those who dare to disagree with the "facts". The man-made global warming phenomenum is simply an excuse to screw more taxes out of us.

Incidentally, I've yet to see "green" versions of the traditional-type bulbs needed for fridge/oven lights

[Not so ancient mariner]

Re: Light Bulbs


Quote

Postby Silver_Shiney » 07 Apr 2015 19:27

Notso, please remember that accurate recording of the ice only started in 1979, so there is only 36 years' worth of data to examine. This is insufficient to make the sort of "accurate" claims being made. The simple fact is that the climate has been changing since the Flood.

That is true for the icepacks, but measurements of glaciers have been made for longer and their rate of shrinkage has increased, Anyhow going back to the ice caps, for those 36 years, the ice has been constantly decreasing, with no signs of slowing down.

Chickens have an inconvenient habit of coming home to roost - so we shall see.

On a less contentious note, with regard to oven, fridge bulbs etc, I suspect it is because:

1: There's a lot less of them than ordinary bulbs
2: They are generally very low wattage anyway - so potential energy savings would be low
3: They are normally on for relatively short periods - which reinforces the point above

[barr0ld]

I always worry that the light may stay on when I close the fridge door. So I drilled a hole through the door so that I can monitor the situation and sleep easily....

[Stephen]

I always worry that the light may stay on when I close the fridge door. So I drilled a hole through the door so that I can monitor the situation and sleep easily....

I done the same with our freezer. Works a treat doesn't it. For some reason though the grocery bill has gone sky high. I think the wife has taken on a lodger and not told me.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well after spending another £2.50 per light (a total of 24 of them) on ferrite core suppressors I've now managed to get our energy saving 12volt LED spotlights so I can turn them on and still listen to the radio. I reckon with the saving on electricity offset against the capital cost I should break even by about 2050, by which time we'll know one way or the other whether I've saved the world.

[Stephen]

Well after spending another £2.50 per light (a total of 24 of them) on ferrite core suppressors I've now managed to get our energy saving 12volt LED spotlights so I can turn them on and still listen to the radio. I reckon with the saving on electricity offset against the capital cost I should break even by about 2050, by which time we'll know one way or the other whether I've saved the world.

By that time Merv the only bulbs that will matter will be the ones your pushing up

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well after spending another £2.50 per light (a total of 24 of them) on ferrite core suppressors I've now managed to get our energy saving 12volt LED spotlights so I can turn them on and still listen to the radio. I reckon with the saving on electricity offset against the capital cost I should break even by about 2050, by which time we'll know one way or the other whether I've saved the world.

By that time Merv the only bulbs that will matter will be the ones your pushing up

These LEDs have cost a fortune Stephen. I'm determined to outlive them - and they're supposed to last 25 years. I want to be here to demand my money back when they only last 24!

[Stephen]

Well after spending another £2.50 per light (a total of 24 of them) on ferrite core suppressors I've now managed to get our energy saving 12volt LED spotlights so I can turn them on and still listen to the radio. I reckon with the saving on electricity offset against the capital cost I should break even by about 2050, by which time we'll know one way or the other whether I've saved the world.

By that time Merv the only bulbs that will matter will be the ones your pushing up

These LEDs have cost a fortune Stephen. I'm determined to outlive them - and they're supposed to last 25 years. I want to be here to demand my money back when they only last 24!

Make sure you laminate the receipt