Rising tide of zealots

York Press: . .

IT IS 60 years since we have had tides as high as those seen on the East coast.

It will be interesting to see how the climate-change zealots explain this, as they say sea levels have been continually rising for some time now.

No doubt they will quote data taken in unheard of places from the back of beyond.

Geoff Robb, Hunters Close, Dunnington.

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:30am Sat 7 Dec 13

Bad magic says...

Obvious troll is obvious.
Obvious troll is obvious. Bad magic

9:50am Sat 7 Dec 13

Jonthan says...

What is there to explain?
I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know.

Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?
What is there to explain? I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know. Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington? Jonthan

10:49am Sat 7 Dec 13

Pinza-C55 says...

Jonthan wrote:
What is there to explain?
I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know.

Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?
Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: What is there to explain? I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know. Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?[/p][/quote]Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style. Pinza-C55

10:57am Sat 7 Dec 13

Fat Harry says...

High winds + high tide + low pressure = the events of the other night. No mystery, nothing new, neither proves nor disproves climate change. Mr Robb is scraping the bottom of his barrel of non-arguments
High winds + high tide + low pressure = the events of the other night. No mystery, nothing new, neither proves nor disproves climate change. Mr Robb is scraping the bottom of his barrel of non-arguments Fat Harry

11:08am Sat 7 Dec 13

Jonthan says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
Jonthan wrote:
What is there to explain?
I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know.

Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?
Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.
I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them.

But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: What is there to explain? I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know. Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?[/p][/quote]Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.[/p][/quote]I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them. But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides? Jonthan

11:36am Sat 7 Dec 13

Temburong says...

"Zealots"- meaning the vast majority of the Scientific community with their long term, data based research pointing out that the evidence looks like Climate change and man's contribution to it is looking very likely.
"Zealots"- meaning the vast majority of the Scientific community with their long term, data based research pointing out that the evidence looks like Climate change and man's contribution to it is looking very likely. Temburong

12:48pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Omega Point says...

"No doubt they will quote data taken in unheard of places from the back of beyond"

Hardly a reasoned comment is it.
"No doubt they will quote data taken in unheard of places from the back of beyond" Hardly a reasoned comment is it. Omega Point

1:25pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Buzzz Light-year says...

I believe the climate change debate has got so messy, so mired in people's entrenched views and propaganda that it is virtually impossible to study any information or data and to be able to take a genuinely knowledgable stance which isn't based on passionate bias of any persuasion.

How fitting then, that this is yet another terrible letter from Mr Robb.
As usual he offers no qualification, explanation, advice, solutions or ideas. No intellectual stimulation, nothing thought-provoking.

His letters take this format:

Dear Press
I saw/ heard/ you reported A Thing.
I think This about That Thing.
I'm not going to explain why I'm right about That Thing but I am right and everyone else who doesn't think so hasn't got a clue and everything else is nonsense.
Oh and if I can blame the council, all the better.
So there.

And The Press print them almost every other day.
I believe the climate change debate has got so messy, so mired in people's entrenched views and propaganda that it is virtually impossible to study any information or data and to be able to take a genuinely knowledgable stance which isn't based on passionate bias of any persuasion. How fitting then, that this is yet another terrible letter from Mr Robb. As usual he offers no qualification, explanation, advice, solutions or ideas. No intellectual stimulation, nothing thought-provoking. His letters take this format: Dear Press I saw/ heard/ you reported A Thing. I think This about That Thing. I'm not going to explain why I'm right about That Thing but I am right and everyone else who doesn't think so hasn't got a clue and everything else is nonsense. Oh and if I can blame the council, all the better. So there. And The Press print them almost every other day. Buzzz Light-year

6:50pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Ichabod76 says...

Jonthan wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
Jonthan wrote:
What is there to explain?
I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know.

Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?
Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.
I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them.

But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?
So just an insult then ?
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: What is there to explain? I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know. Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?[/p][/quote]Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.[/p][/quote]I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them. But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?[/p][/quote]So just an insult then ? Ichabod76

8:21pm Sat 7 Dec 13

ColdAsChristmas says...

Nerdy sites like the Guardian.
I think what Mr Robb was getting at was that almost any extreme weather even is blamed on man made global warming, despite not a single event has been thus proven. But that won't stop the propaganda and the scare merchants. Or the nerdy Jonthan....
Nerdy sites like the Guardian. I think what Mr Robb was getting at was that almost any extreme weather even is blamed on man made global warming, despite not a single event has been thus proven. But that won't stop the propaganda and the scare merchants. Or the nerdy Jonthan.... ColdAsChristmas

2:13am Sun 8 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

Ah yes, the climate change brigade have arrived.

Weather like this is a simple game of odds, like a lot of weather - it's just that with more 'normal' weather the odds are closer. The odds of wind coming from a certain direction are 1 in 8 (1:8) if you use an 8-pointed compass; the odds of pressure systems being close together enough to bring high speed winds is somewhere in the region of 1:20; the odds of a deep low pressure system curving around the northeast corner of scotland has it's own odds, as does high winds developing when a high tide is due etc etc.... you combine two factors together and the odds alter with it (for example, a high speed southerly wind could go to something like 1:60), you combine three factors together and the odds stack up even more against the event happening... the Storm Surge was caused by a deep low developing off the northeast corner of scotland, complete with a weatherfront, in addition to tight isobars bringing high speed winds, added to the winds being from a north-based direction, the highest speed winds timed themselves just as a high tide developed (which also just so happened to be a particularly high tide anyway aside of the storm - I believe it was an 'autumn tide'), the weather system then moved in the same direction as the high tide ensuring the winds pushed along in the same direction... and all of these combined to bring the storm surge, 6-7 different key factors all of which have their own odds of each factor happening... the odds would have been several thousand to one against. Things like the Storm Surge have happened in the past and WILL happen again... the last one was in 1953 on the east coast, and I'm pretty sure they didn't have 'climate change' back then! But a key difference between then and now, is that back then they had hardly any sea defences - the surge came and swept inland for a significant distance and was several feet deep; because that happened most coastal boroughs decided to build protective sea walls, and it is because of that wise decision that places such as scarborough only got up to 2ft of water on the coastal road instead of 6ft or more. We cannot prevent such 'freak weather' from occuring, and to think we can is unbelieveably arrogant.

I won't say what I think of those who have assigned this event to 'climate change' because my view on life is that people are entitled to a belief so long as they don't try and force that belief upon others against their will.
Ah yes, the climate change brigade have arrived. Weather like this is a simple game of odds, like a lot of weather - it's just that with more 'normal' weather the odds are closer. The odds of wind coming from a certain direction are 1 in 8 (1:8) if you use an 8-pointed compass; the odds of pressure systems being close together enough to bring high speed winds is somewhere in the region of 1:20; the odds of a deep low pressure system curving around the northeast corner of scotland has it's own odds, as does high winds developing when a high tide is due etc etc.... you combine two factors together and the odds alter with it (for example, a high speed southerly wind could go to something like 1:60), you combine three factors together and the odds stack up even more against the event happening... the Storm Surge was caused by a deep low developing off the northeast corner of scotland, complete with a weatherfront, in addition to tight isobars bringing high speed winds, added to the winds being from a north-based direction, the highest speed winds timed themselves just as a high tide developed (which also just so happened to be a particularly high tide anyway aside of the storm - I believe it was an 'autumn tide'), the weather system then moved in the same direction as the high tide ensuring the winds pushed along in the same direction... and all of these combined to bring the storm surge, 6-7 different key factors all of which have their own odds of each factor happening... the odds would have been several thousand to one against. Things like the Storm Surge have happened in the past and WILL happen again... the last one was in 1953 on the east coast, and I'm pretty sure they didn't have 'climate change' back then! But a key difference between then and now, is that back then they had hardly any sea defences - the surge came and swept inland for a significant distance and was several feet deep; because that happened most coastal boroughs decided to build protective sea walls, and it is because of that wise decision that places such as scarborough only got up to 2ft of water on the coastal road instead of 6ft or more. We cannot prevent such 'freak weather' from occuring, and to think we can is unbelieveably arrogant. I won't say what I think of those who have assigned this event to 'climate change' because my view on life is that people are entitled to a belief so long as they don't try and force that belief upon others against their will. Magicman!

10:21am Sun 8 Dec 13

CaroleBaines says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Nerdy sites like the Guardian.
I think what Mr Robb was getting at was that almost any extreme weather even is blamed on man made global warming, despite not a single event has been thus proven. But that won't stop the propaganda and the scare merchants. Or the nerdy Jonthan....
Says it all really doesn't it. Flat earth society stuff as usual from COC.
Me I prefer reasoned scientific data.
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Nerdy sites like the Guardian. I think what Mr Robb was getting at was that almost any extreme weather even is blamed on man made global warming, despite not a single event has been thus proven. But that won't stop the propaganda and the scare merchants. Or the nerdy Jonthan....[/p][/quote]Says it all really doesn't it. Flat earth society stuff as usual from COC. Me I prefer reasoned scientific data. CaroleBaines

10:25am Sun 8 Dec 13

Pinza-C55 says...

Jonthan wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
Jonthan wrote:
What is there to explain?
I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know.

Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?
Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.
I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them.

But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?
Well...lets start with "However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason".
Definition of Ad Hominem
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Its an attack on the person Jonthan, not their arguments. I neither know nor care anything of the person of anyone who posts here, nor does it matter.
Arguments stand or fall on their own merits, not the merits of the individual."
"By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them."
He/she probably doesn't care about the allegation; at least he provides links whereas you neither make an argument nor provide links.
" But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?"
I have neither the time or the interest to discuss CC at length but here is Penn Gillette on the subject, speaking at a conference of atheists and skeptics.
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=xE0UkL4tj
pg
" I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century."
That's an interesting phrase since "this century" actually means "in the last 13 years", but sounds more dramatic? Also it excludes Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Was that your intention?
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: What is there to explain? I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century. It was probably the same 60 years ago. Perhaps Geoff Robb will let us know. Much more intersting than all that is the case of ColdAsChristmas who writes all the time on this site and who haunts all the nerdy climate change denial websites. What I want to know is, does ColdAs live in Dunnington?[/p][/quote]Nice Ad Hominem Jonthan. You haven't lost your style.[/p][/quote]I'm flattered. However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason. It is the reason. or lack of it in the letter, and the curious similarity to ColdAs' views that I was commenting on. By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them. But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?[/p][/quote]Well...lets start with "However ad hominem means an appeal to the emotions and not to reason". Definition of Ad Hominem http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Ad_hominem Its an attack on the person Jonthan, not their arguments. I neither know nor care anything of the person of anyone who posts here, nor does it matter. Arguments stand or fall on their own merits, not the merits of the individual." "By the way he does not deny the nerdy sites allegation, he/she often provides links to them." He/she probably doesn't care about the allegation; at least he provides links whereas you neither make an argument nor provide links. " But don't be shy, what is your take on climate change and the high tides?" I have neither the time or the interest to discuss CC at length but here is Penn Gillette on the subject, speaking at a conference of atheists and skeptics. http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=xE0UkL4tj pg " I think everyone in the country knows that the extraordinary tides were driven by the most powerful gale we have had in England this century." That's an interesting phrase since "this century" actually means "in the last 13 years", but sounds more dramatic? Also it excludes Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, Was that your intention? Pinza-C55

11:00am Mon 9 Dec 13

Jonthan says...

Pinza, calm down dear.
You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition (Clarendon Press and it reads as follows Ad Hominem --- related to or associated with a particular person (of an argument) appealing to the emotions and not to reason.

I'm sorry, I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change
Pinza, calm down dear. You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition (Clarendon Press and it reads as follows Ad Hominem --- related to or associated with a particular person (of an argument) appealing to the emotions and not to reason. I'm sorry, I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change Jonthan

11:17am Mon 9 Dec 13

Pinza-C55 says...

Jonthan wrote:
Pinza, calm down dear.
You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition (Clarendon Press and it reads as follows Ad Hominem --- related to or associated with a particular person (of an argument) appealing to the emotions and not to reason.

I'm sorry, I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change
I'm perfectly calm and I am curious why you would address me as "dear"?
"You are half right "
No, I am entirely right but you are scrambling to look as if you weren't entirely wrong.
"I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change".
Clearly not; you should have left it at "I am not qualified". However , I am sure you will soon post at length on the subject even though you are unqualified to do so..
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: Pinza, calm down dear. You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition (Clarendon Press and it reads as follows Ad Hominem --- related to or associated with a particular person (of an argument) appealing to the emotions and not to reason. I'm sorry, I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change[/p][/quote]I'm perfectly calm and I am curious why you would address me as "dear"? "You are half right " No, I am entirely right but you are scrambling to look as if you weren't entirely wrong. "I am not qualified to help you with your confusion over the facts of man made climate change". Clearly not; you should have left it at "I am not qualified". However , I am sure you will soon post at length on the subject even though you are unqualified to do so.. Pinza-C55

4:24pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Ichabod76 says...

You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition

Maybe Jonthan,
its you that is only half right with your 22 year old information !
You are half right but you should rely on a better dictionary. Mine is the Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1991 edition Maybe Jonthan, its you that is only half right with your 22 year old information ! Ichabod76

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree