We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Fenbeagle • 4 years ago

Mr Leans Cod piece subjected to closer scrutiny. Seems to contain little of merit.

Old Gilet Goat • 4 years ago

Yes, it's certainly an alternative "angle"...

JacksonPearson • 4 years ago


Expendable • 4 years ago

I certainly find his claims fishy.

SuffolkBoy • 4 years ago

Do you know where I can get scrod around here?

Rush_is_Right • 4 years ago

"Sea temperatures around Britain, for example, have risen by 1.6 per cent"

And what the hell does that mean? If (for example) a temperature rises from 5 degrees Centigrade to 6 degrees, that's a 20% increase, right? But in Fahrenheit the same temperature increase from 41 degrees to 42.8 is only 4.4% And in degrees absolute its an increase from 278 to 279 which is less than 0.4%

You can't express temperature changes in terms of percentages, simples. But you can't expect an eco-tard to understand that.

Oldeagle145 • 4 years ago

My question always is as compared to what? There is 4.5 billion years of climate history, so what is their baseline? They just spew numbers because they know that there are climate zombies out there who won't question anything they say.

Individualist • 4 years ago

Even beyond the temperature claims one has to review the "evidence" that CO2 is increasing. According to what I have read they took ice core samples and designated them by year. Put that ice in a vacuum chamber and measured the CO2. Did this in Greenland and Antarctica. Greenland cores did not agree with Antartica nor did a study of the pores of ancient leaves. So they dismissned Greenland samples saying that Calcium Carbonate from vulcanism skewed it and the leaves were to seasonally affected. That left one point of observation on which to base their findings. The South Pole.
There chart claims that in 50 years CO2 increased from 285 ppm to 365 ppm (parts per million) in the atmosphere.
What they don't address is the fact that the coldest temp in Antarctica is -88 Celcisus year round it averages -4 to -81 degrees celcius. This is important because CO2 condenses to a solid in normal atmosphere at -78 degrees Celsius. South Pole blogs brag that it is so cold there the CO2 from your breath freezes to dry ice in front of you when it leaves the scarf covering your mouth.
How would this not skew the level of CO2 you'd find in the upper part of the ice in the South Pole. No mention of this is made in their description of the studies.

Dogzzz • 4 years ago

Thank You!!!! I have been saying that for ages, Especialy every winter when the thermometer in my car goes from 2 degrees C to 4 degrees and my wife tells me the temperature has doubled. Not if we measure it in Kelvin it hasn't!

Any idiot who claims the temperature has risen by a percentage has no right writing about science at all!!!

Chris Try • 4 years ago

James, Please, don't hold back like this. Say what you really think! Great post

yaosxx • 4 years ago

The trouble is Lean is still having the last laugh because he knows no matter how stupid or inane his articles are, useless DT will still publish them!!!

Old Gilet Goat • 4 years ago

And we will still laugh at them.

ZipInKent • 4 years ago

We shall laugh on the beaches, we shall laugh on the landing grounds, we shall laugh in the fields and in the streets, we shall laugh in the hills.

colliemum • 4 years ago

Look James - it's perfectly obvious:
the heat which has been hiding in the oceanic depths, so strenuously sought for by climate scientists like Mr Trenberth for years now, is finally surfacing!
It's coming to the top!!
It's heating the oceans from below!!!
It's killing the fish!!!!
We're all doomed!!!1eleventy!!1!

Guest • 4 years ago
colliemum • 4 years ago

They must've gone there to escape the heat form the boiling oceans, fer sure!

The_RS_Gadfly • 4 years ago

The best part is, when we talk about the Little Ice Age, that gets dismissed as a Local Phenomena. Now even if I were willing to grant that it ONLY affected Europe, isn't all of Europe (including England) a good bit larger than "sea temperatures around Britain"?

Individualist • 4 years ago

Little Ice Age was not a local phenomena. In the early 1800's the Hudson Bay used to freeze over completely in the winter. That does not happen today.

ZipInKent • 4 years ago

So. AGW must be real because... fish. Or, if you prefer, because... no fish.

Good. That's sorted then. Isn't climate science wonderful?

Old Gilet Goat • 4 years ago

It's imaginary...

ZipInKent • 4 years ago

But the fish are settled!

Guest • 4 years ago
Mark B • 4 years ago

Its that gravy train they are all riding. It got to be constantly fuelled.

Wynston_Smyth • 4 years ago

And they fully well know that intelligent, inquisitive, skeptical adults know that most, if not all of the global warming theories are pure hogwash designed to complete the socialist dominion over the free world. So they are now unabashedly targeting their brain-washing upon our school children and college students. If they can't get the current adult generations to fall in line with their misinformation, they can turn the hoax on the young and impressionable and train the next generation of radical hard-core zealots.

Guest • 4 years ago

James, did one take the opportunity whilst in Salcombe to go clubbing (the seal).

The old ones are the best.

I have given up with the Telegraph!

Guest • 4 years ago
Guest • 4 years ago

No, sorry Paul you have not managed to change my mind.

jakespoon • 4 years ago

So,bluefin tuna caught off Greenland for the first time in 342 years. If modern manmade global warming caused that,why was the fish there 342 years ago?

SuffolkBoy • 4 years ago

Please, Sir, I know the answer! "Natural Very Ability". (Well, my mate Gavin says so and he's always right and his Dad works at NASA.)

TJB • 4 years ago

Coming soon to a climate alarmist's desk near you, Are wind turbines changing weather patterns? Does 18th century Holland have questions to answer for building dykes, drainage systems and tidal dams? Does the Thames Barrier kill great white sharks off Florida coast? Did the Ancient Egyptians alter the course of history by worshipping Ra, thereby encouraging the sun to shine more?

Oldeagle145 • 4 years ago

The friction of the wind turbine blades increases the local temperature around each turbine .00000000000031%. So this in turn causes air to swirl off the coast if India which increases the friction coefficient of the sea water moving over the coast which in turn causes a .00000000000000011% local increase in air temps which in turn causes dual hurricanes to move toward Hawaii.. I think I got the logic of climate alarmists right here didn't I?

TJB • 4 years ago

Almost, but I have a feeling that your numbers may be a little too accurate to count as science for them. If they are we can always jiggle the numbers later and then deny we've anything to hide.

grumpyangler • 4 years ago

I can confirm that cod off our coast are wild, more than that, the cod I've caught have been bloody furious.

Rifleman1853 • 4 years ago


Guest • 4 years ago

I did a cruise on one of the UK's fisheries research vessel a few years ago. The biologists onboard were rod catching cod and placing a tracker in them and releasing them again. It was interesting stuff.

Speaking to the scientist in charge, he mentioned that we had so overfished cod, that we had genetically changed the species forcing them to become sexually mature much earlier in their lives.

JohnGa1t • 4 years ago

James, don't waste time on idiots like Mr (Leftward)Lean. Nobody with more than half a brain would take any of his ramblings seriously. The BBC is the problem we skeptics have, that is the ground that needs to be fought for.

english_pensioner • 4 years ago

I think the fish want to leave the EU and prefer Iceland which is not in it.

Old Gilet Goat • 4 years ago

There's certainly more room in an Iceland refrigerator...

RichWall • 4 years ago

Now they will be going after 'Fish Deniers'.

Testa Sterone • 4 years ago

I love my fish deniers with a little lemon and tartar sauce! Do they serve them with or without chips???

AlecM • 4 years ago

Have a look at Arctic ice extent folks: http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/...

Almost back to the 1979 - 2000 average!

Alb Einsteinivenko • 4 years ago

We saw a drop in the AMO index this year (probably temporary this time), but the response in the arctic is beginning to look interesting. So much egg on so many faces when it flips properly and the arctic ice rebounds very rapidly.

AlecM • 4 years ago

1 The Arctic system is inherently unstable, so oscillates.

2 There is no CO2-AGW so CO2 has no effect.

greatnesslostislegend • 4 years ago

Interesting track for 2014. Also: Note 1979 to 2000, not 1900 to 2000, or even 500 AD to 2000 AD. A 21 year time line is not a something to base any conclusion on.

A book, 1421, provides reference to Chinese account of their global ocean voyages in that century. One reference is sailing north of the Arctic islands, including Green Land. Something you cannot do today.

From ocean mud, to tree ring data, it all shows it has been considerably warmer in the past. In addition based on pace Earth's biosphere can scrub out carbon dioxide, diminishing impact of increased concentration (100 PPM from 300 to 400 already having about a 1.4C positive impact, but from 400 to 500, a 0.7 C impact, and 500 to 600 a 0.4C impact), even if we burned every bit of oil, gas, coal, and stick of wood, the Earth would not increase temps anywhere near what scare mongers cite. In addition it would take the Earth about 300 years to lower a concentration of 750PPM back to 280, the level before industrialization.

This means no panic. Maximum temperature rise on the order of 2C more than medium now. It will rain a bit more, dry in some other areas due to Jet Stream meandering, and sea level rising about a foot per century through 2400 or so before falling back. We can adapt to this over that amount of time. With global GDP in excess of $100 Trillion by the end of 2018, easier than any other time in human history.

Obama says 95% of climate scientists support global warming theory however he never points this out: 80 of those 95 scientists do not support Obama climate change policy, or sky is falling rhetoric...

AlecM • 4 years ago

21 years is the complete satellite record.

There is no CO2-AGW - the atmosphere automatically compensates for pCO2 rise or fall.

Other processes control the GHE.

Richard Delingpole • 4 years ago

Gotta love Geoff. Worth every penny Shell pay him.

Guest • 4 years ago

I feel for Geoffrey. He's based his whole career on this stuff. Sure he's been well paid, but how must it feel in retirement (nearly there Geoff) to know that your whole career has been based on selling a lie.

He's the modern equivalent of a carpet bagger selling miracle potions to a poor unsuspecting public. He can't admit that the potion is useless or else those he's taken in will turn on him and lynch him so he has to keep up the pretense and tell bigger and bigger fibs to keep the whole bandwagon on the road.

I couldn't live with myself if it was me.

bufo75 • 4 years ago

David Hone, Shell's "Senior Climate Change Adviser" will have been delighted with his "shill" within the pages of the Telegraph.
Geoffrey has, after all, done more than any man living, to prevent the exploitation of our shale gas reserves.
One trusts that the rulers of gas-rich Qatar (home of World Football) are equally grateful.

Rifleman1853 • 4 years ago

And I doubt Putin will be complaining, either.

Rifleman1853 • 4 years ago

But, Diggery - you aren't a loonie leftie - they can convince themselves that ten impossible lies are true before breakfast . . .