Dear Jennifer.
Please find below a link which will take you directly to the monthly newsletter (ca. 1.8 MB) with meteorological information updated to February 2012:
http://www.climate4you.com/Text/Climate4you_February_2012.pdf
All temperatures in this newsletter are shown in degrees Celsius.
Previous issues (since March 2009) of the newsletter, diagrams and additional material are available on http://www.climate4you.com/
All the best,
Ole Humlum
Ole Humlum, Professor of Physical Geography
University of Oslo, Norway
"It is all a bountiful harvest for cherry pickers devoid of scepticism and avoiding exposing thier beliefs to disconfirming evidence." gotta love that quote Bazza...you do have a sense of humour!
that is exactly what the warmist movement has done, picked a short period of time and turned it into proof of the evils of co2. correlation is not causation, and even the correlation has been lacking for a decade ( and 1940-1975!?)......If you arent a bit sceptical Bazza, then you are the one devoid of scepticism.
your mob are causing far more harm than good. The damage being done to the environment by "feel good" platitudes, such as wind farms, solar panels, electric cars, ethanol, carbon price, renewable subsisides et al do far more harm than good.
To suggest that "your mob" care more than "my mob" is also the height of stupidity since if we didnt waste so much money on this theory we could actually build real hospitals, real wells and raise real living standards around teh world.
Instead, Australians are being forced to have lower living standards and be able to assist fewer people in need...The platitudes pushed by believers in CAGW come at a great social cost and cause no real benefit. Without new technology we are playing at the edges even if there really is a need to act. And that is still very much up in the air despite the bleatings that "the science is settled".
Well yes Bazza,
I have noticed you lack a sense of humour in relation to this topic.
Doesn't do anything to damage mine.
You are making me laugh even more at your attempt to pretend that you 'care' more about the 'victims' of extreme weather events because you're a 'believer' in AGW and I find the ever mounting numbers of contradictory reports that only prove we don't know enough yet, highly ironic.
I have personal experience in just how woefully inadequate the current agenda is in actually achieving anything we could define as 'worthwhile' in dealing with helping so called 'victims'.
It is only interested in being less accountable and avoiding risk and responsibility NOT in actually doing something practical.
They just want to waste our time and money proving that they're right and that we therefore need to pay for their 'well covered' arses.
I'm also laughing out loud at your use of terminology like 'innocents'
Toby Re" I take it you disagree with all/ most of OLE’s data do you?". I assume his data is what it says it is. The issues are firstly the occasionally silly bits of curve fitting and bazaar extrapolations and second, the misleading of the innocents and others. It is all a bountiful harvest for cherry pickers devoid of scepticism and avoiding exposing thier beliefs to disconfirming evidence. He even cautions in the text about not reading too much into the short term fluctuations about the rising trends for example.
Scafetta is being savaged at Watts.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/21/scafettas-new-paper-attempts-to-link-climate-cycles-to-planetary-motion/