Climate change - the POLITICAL debate (Vol 6)

[Gadgetmac]

PRTVR said:

Gadgetmac said:

PRTVR said:

Greeny said:

Gadgetmac said:

Which bit of "I am irrelevant when compared to what scientists in the field think" didn't manage to tunnel it's way into your tiny mind?

I'd guess you also didn't pick up on my comment that I think your question is innane.

Tropical fish in an aquarium have the water at an optimum temperature for a reason, you wouldn't want to start increasing or decreasing that temperature.

Edited by Gadgetmac on Sunday 8th December 17:58

So are you saying that the earths temperature at present is optimum, and like fish in an aquarium we can not survive any minor change in that temperature.
Even though the earths temperature varies vastly across the globe, and people still seem to survive and choose to live in a variety of climates?

On any particular day there is around a 100°C difference between the hottest and coldest points on the earth.

Irrelevant.

Disease will spread to areas previously unaffected as just one example of how humans will suffer. Crops could fail. There are many many ways in which human suffering could grow and more people will die prematurely.

The temperature of the planet is irrelevant, OK if you say so.

Yes, ignore the point I made completely

[robinessex]

Gadgetmac said:

Robinessex: Quick question, is the temperature of the planet rising? In other words is there global warming?

A simple Yes or No will suffice.

Just want to make sure you're being consistent because you've always said it isn't.

Cheers.

Try answering my question. Or is this another swerve?

[Tony427]

Greeny said:

Halb said:

I know this is old and has probably been posted here, but it pipped up on my yt list as I was in the gym.
Professor Jordan Peterson on climate change and climate policy at the Cambridge Union
GWPF
https://youtu.be/pBbvehbomrY
6mins

Nov 8th 2018, I posted that. He talks a lot of sense

Thanks for that. He certainly does. You could almost see the lightbulbs switching on above peoples heads.

[Gadgetmac]

robinessex said:

Gadgetmac said:

Robinessex: Quick question, is the temperature of the planet rising? In other words is there global warming?

A simple Yes or No will suffice.

Just want to make sure you're being consistent because you've always said it isn't.

Cheers.

Try answering my question. Or is this another swerve?

I've just looked back and you haven't asked me a direct question.

Now, that being the case, please answer my question. No "swerving" as you call it.

[Gadgetmac]

[JustALooseScrew]

Gadgetmac said:

JustALooseScrew said:

Gadgetmac said:

So the whole of the human race should migrate north or south? Not really a solution is it. You've seen what happens when less than a quarter of Syria wants to leave for more prosperous parts, let alone any large scale migration.

Gagetmac has a point. It's obviously far better to tax us into oblivion because CO2 and unrenewables, such that we're all back living in mud huts and caves and using donkeys to plough this green and pleasant land.

Who knows maybe the majority of the Northern Hemisphere's population will become climate refugees and we can all move to a warmer camp in Syria.

That's brilliant, and can't have used up all of your crayon set either.

Win-win.

I'm just finally realising you are way more cleverer than me. Would you mind sending me sending me the post code for your cave? Oh wait....

[PRTVR]

Gadgetmac said:

PRTVR said:

Gadgetmac said:

PRTVR said:

Greeny said:

Gadgetmac said:

Which bit of "I am irrelevant when compared to what scientists in the field think" didn't manage to tunnel it's way into your tiny mind?

I'd guess you also didn't pick up on my comment that I think your question is innane.

Tropical fish in an aquarium have the water at an optimum temperature for a reason, you wouldn't want to start increasing or decreasing that temperature.

Edited by Gadgetmac on Sunday 8th December 17:58

So are you saying that the earths temperature at present is optimum, and like fish in an aquarium we can not survive any minor change in that temperature.
Even though the earths temperature varies vastly across the globe, and people still seem to survive and choose to live in a variety of climates?

On any particular day there is around a 100°C difference between the hottest and coldest points on the earth.

Irrelevant.

Disease will spread to areas previously unaffected as just one example of how humans will suffer. Crops could fail. There are many many ways in which human suffering could grow and more people will die prematurely.

The temperature of the planet is irrelevant, OK if you say so.

Yes, ignore the point I made completely

Not ignoring what you said, no more than you ignored what I said, think about it,
we live on a planet with a massive difference in temperatures,
do you honestly believe a 2 degree increase in temperatures is going to cause crops to fail and diseases to spread ?
How do we survive with the change in seasons and the subsequent increase in temperatures.

[Gadgetmac]

JustALooseScrew said:

'm just finally realising you are way more cleverer than me. Would you mind sending me sending me the post code for your cave? Oh wait....

I'd say thanks for the compliment but, to be fair, cleverer than you is not a very high bar.

[jakesmith]

PRTVR said:

Not ignoring what you said, no more than you ignored what I said, think about it,
we live on a planet with a massive difference in temperatures,
do you honestly believe a 2 degree increase in temperatures is going to cause crops to fail and diseases to spread ?
How do we survive with the change in seasons and the subsequent increase in temperatures.

How do you explain the need for dual zone climate control in cars then?
Not the sharpest tool are you!

[LongQ]

Down and out said:

robinessex said:

Mrr T said:

Gadgetmac said:

Article in Psychology Today about tackling climate change denial.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.c...

It's a thing.

Psychology is a science in serious crisis.

I think Psychologists should stick to Psychology. They seem to lack the intelligence for any original thought.

You get an ology, you're a scientist.

But the chap is an trist not ologist.

[LongQ]

jakesmith said:

PRTVR said:

Not ignoring what you said, no more than you ignored what I said, think about it,
we live on a planet with a massive difference in temperatures,
do you honestly believe a 2 degree increase in temperatures is going to cause crops to fail and diseases to spread ?
How do we survive with the change in seasons and the subsequent increase in temperatures.

How do you explain the need for dual zone climate control in cars then?
Not the sharpest tool are you!

That's an easy one.

It's there to persuade buyers that the car is worth about £1000 more than the lesser model and persuade them to give the dealer, the manufacturer and any authorities that derive value based taxation more than the car is worth for a nominal 10 years of use before, inter alia, the AC fails and the car is deemed unrepairable with the associated waste of materials and energy for its early demise.

In the other hand there may be a practical use of the dual zone if, for example, at the COP jamboree in Madrid a native Canadian and a person from one of the hotter Arabian counties happen to be sharing a vehicle and one find Madrid at this time of year too hot and the other finds it too cold.

Other than that, and probably not even that, there is no NEED for dual zone climate in cars.

It's like plastic.

There is no need for plastic ... provided that humans can find enough replacement materials or give up some of the things they currently need.

Replacement materials, presumably a return to wood and metal mainly plus whatever materials can be derived from plants (but not animals of course) for clothing, might be difficult to grow in time for wood to be an option (and a renewable option) whilst creating the metals with reduced energy availability might be a similar challenge.

In some scenarios with evident political momentum for "change" life in a decade or two could be very interesting indeed.

[Diderot]

Gadgetmac said:

Robinessex: Quick question, is the temperature of the planet rising? In other words is there global warming?

A simple Yes or No will suffice.

Just want to make sure you're being consistent because you've always said it isn't.

Cheers.

It’s called global heating now silly. Did you not get the Guardian memo? Got to ramp up the dramatic language to frighten the terminally gullible into truly believing. It’s an emergency!

[PRTVR]

jakesmith said:

PRTVR said:

Not ignoring what you said, no more than you ignored what I said, think about it,
we live on a planet with a massive difference in temperatures,
do you honestly believe a 2 degree increase in temperatures is going to cause crops to fail and diseases to spread ?
How do we survive with the change in seasons and the subsequent increase in temperatures.

How do you explain the need for dual zone climate control in cars then?
Not the sharpest tool are you!

How did I miss such an important point, I am now a BELIEVER.

[anonymous-user]

How much greehouse gas from a volcano?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-50708727

[durbster]

PRTVR said:

Not ignoring what you said, no more than you ignored what I said, think about it,
we live on a planet with a massive difference in temperatures,
do you honestly believe a 2 degree increase in temperatures is going to cause crops to fail and diseases to spread ?
How do we survive with the change in seasons and the subsequent increase in temperatures.

The last ice age was only a 4 degree difference, putting large chunks of the northern hemisphere under hundreds of metres of ice.

So yes, a 2 degree difference in temperature is likely to have a significant impact.

[Electro1980]

Tony427 said:

Greeny said:

Halb said:

I know this is old and has probably been posted here, but it pipped up on my yt list as I was in the gym.
Professor Jordan Peterson on climate change and climate policy at the Cambridge Union
GWPF
https://youtu.be/pBbvehbomrY
6mins

Nov 8th 2018, I posted that. He talks a lot of sense

Thanks for that. He certainly does. You could almost see the lightbulbs switching on above peoples heads.

What are his qualifications? Being a university lecturer (he has the job title professor, not the title Professor. Two different things, one being the job title of a teacher in a US university, the other being a title conferred upon the most senior academics who head up departments) or speaking at the Cambridge Union do not give him authority. He is a clinical psychologist, with no more authority on the subject than you or I. Missing out that fact and putting professor and Cambridge in there are an attempt to give him authority he does not have.

Edited by Electro1980 on Monday 9th December 08:17

[Gadgetmac]

Robinessex: You're being very 'swervy' Rob.

It was a simple question. Are you going to answer it or not?

[robinessex]

Gadgetmac said:

Robinessex: You're being very 'swervy' Rob.

It was a simple question. Are you going to answer it or not?

My question repeated, as obviously understanding what's posted here isn't one of your strong points.

"The temperature of the plane is a useless average. What the hell does that tell you that's of any practical use?"

There you go. (Note the ? at the end of that). That's a question mark.

[robinessex]

Climate change: UN negotiators 'playing politics' amid global crisis

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-507...

UN negotiators meeting in Madrid have been accused of "playing politics" while the climate crisis grows.
The talks - now in their final week - are bogged down in technical details as key countries seek to delay efforts to increase their pledges, observers say.
Ministers are due to arrive in the Spanish capital this week to try to secure an ambitious outcome......continues

Looks as if the children at the party are starting squabble!!!

[Mrr T]

durbster said:

The last ice age was only a 4 degree difference, putting large chunks of the northern hemisphere under hundreds of metres of ice.

So yes, a 2 degree difference in temperature is likely to have a significant impact.

Actually the studies claim 4-7 degrees. The problem with the studies is the only data is from ice cores. The problem is we know ice is affected by other factors, particularly by the level of snow fall. Its worth this quote from NASA on the temperature reconstruction.

"The chemical make-up of the ice provides clues to the average global temperature."

One of the major problems with some elements of the climate debate is claiming guess work is knowledge.