Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 6)

Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 6)

Author
Discussion

durbster

8,451 posts

186 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
robinessex said:
durbster said:
robinessex said:
One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8
To save anyone clicking, it's another one of those insane YouTube conspiracy theory channels.

robinessex, why do you demand people respond to your posts and then completely ignore when they do?
Award-Winning Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, formerly of UN IPCC: 'We Are Creating Great Anxiety Without It Being Justified...there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic...The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn't have had meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn't have noticed it at all.'
I mean, you lose every single argument here and everything you post is demonstrably wrong. Often embarrassingly wrong.

But you come back day-after-day to post again. Why?

robinessex

9,183 posts

145 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
Durbs, why do you perpetually 'shoot the messenger?

Durbster on PH Climate Change deniers spotting dutuy



Award-Winning Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, formerly of UN IPCC: 'We Are Creating Great Anxiety Without It Being Justified...there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic...The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn't have had meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn't have noticed it at all.'

Going to comment constructively on that?

Edited by robinessex on Tuesday 2nd March 10:02

Pan Pan Pan

7,688 posts

75 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
durbster said:
robinessex said:
durbster said:
robinessex said:
One Hundred Years of Climate... Change?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwIHCXjJxr8
To save anyone clicking, it's another one of those insane YouTube conspiracy theory channels.

robinessex, why do you demand people respond to your posts and then completely ignore when they do?
Award-Winning Dr. Lennart Bengtsson, formerly of UN IPCC: 'We Are Creating Great Anxiety Without It Being Justified...there are no indications that the warming is so severe that we need to panic...The warming we have had the last a 100 years is so small that if we didn't have had meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn't have noticed it at all.'
I mean, you lose every single argument here and everything you post is demonstrably wrong. Often embarrassingly wrong.

But you come back day-after-day to post again. Why?
As do you, over your pet subject of CO2 emissions. which from others point of view seems equally weird, and obsessive.
Doesn't stop you from doing it though, does it? We all like to promote `our' pet subjects.

durbster

8,451 posts

186 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Going to comment constructively on that?
Nope. Why on earth do you think I would spend time on your daft arguments and crappy YouTube videos when I know for a fact you would simply ignore whatever I said anyway? You aren't worth the effort, frankly.

robinessex

9,183 posts

145 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
durbster said:
robinessex said:
Going to comment constructively on that?
Nope. Why on earth do you think I would spend time on your daft arguments and crappy YouTube videos when I know for a fact you would simply ignore whatever I said anyway? You aren't worth the effort, frankly.
There you go, any opposing view is, by your definition, 'crappy'. Say's it all really, nothing posted her will ever be considered by you as a valid riposte to your CC belief.

durbster

8,451 posts

186 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
robinessex said:
durbster said:
robinessex said:
Going to comment constructively on that?
Nope. Why on earth do you think I would spend time on your daft arguments and crappy YouTube videos when I know for a fact you would simply ignore whatever I said anyway? You aren't worth the effort, frankly.
There you go, any opposing view is, by your definition, 'crappy'.
No, just the crappy ones.

El stovey

37,944 posts

227 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
robinessex said:
durbster said:
robinessex said:
Going to comment constructively on that?
Nope. Why on earth do you think I would spend time on your daft arguments and crappy YouTube videos when I know for a fact you would simply ignore whatever I said anyway? You aren't worth the effort, frankly.
There you go, any opposing view is, by your definition, 'crappy'. Say's it all really, nothing posted her will ever be considered by you as a valid riposte to your CC belief.
Ironic when you’re dismissing the collective judgement of the scientific community and every scientific institution of note on the planet.

But one sciency guy on YouTube must be worth watching hehe

Unfortunately the faith and belief is on your side rob.

turbobloke

92,884 posts

224 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
Bloomberg:

After Historic Fall, Carbon Emissions Are Now Coming Back Fast

In December, global emissions were higher than during the same month in 2019, according to new data from the International Energy Agency.

Governments are allowing emissions to rise again after the covid dip? How dare they!. Hair shirt privation is the new normal, choose your cave early to avoid disappointment.

ATG

17,614 posts

236 months

Tuesday 2nd March
quotequote all
PRTVR said:
The problem comes with imports, great if you ban goods containing steel or aluminium from countries that use coal, Germany, China, etc. If not all you are doing is virtual signaling, destroying our economy but allowing others to thrive.
Perhaps you missed the bit where I talked about the need for international political coordination?

It's also worth pointing out that the market for cooking coal is international, so UK steel doesn't gain a competitive advantage by opening a coking coal mine in the UK. More supply of coke reduces coke prices globally.

ATG

17,614 posts

236 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
deeps said:
Nice try, The national interest and the local interest should be one and the same - to exit the Paris Accord and reverse any virtue signalling CO2 reduction targets before too much harm is done.

Politicians cannot now and will never be capable of controlling Earth's climate. To believe otherwise is dangerously deluded.
No one is trying to "control" the climate. It is pretty obvious that we are collectively capable of knocking the climate from one pattern of behaviour into another. On geological timescales the shift we appear to have accidentally engineered is not that severe, but it is happening rapidly and it would be a severe challenge for us to adapt to the changed environment it seems likely to deliver. So the idea is not to "control" the climate but only to stop changing it as rapidly as we already are.

The idea that humans are incapable of changing the climate is demonstrably wrong. We've already done it. And we can clearly choose to reduce emissions of CO2, methane, etc if we wish.

deeps

4,961 posts

205 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
ATG said:
No one is trying to "control" the climate. It is pretty obvious that we are collectively capable of knocking the climate from one pattern of behaviour into another. On geological timescales the shift we appear to have accidentally engineered is not that severe, but it is happening rapidly and it would be a severe challenge for us to adapt to the changed environment it seems likely to deliver. So the idea is not to "control" the climate but only to stop changing it as rapidly as we already are.

The idea that humans are incapable of changing the climate is demonstrably wrong. We've already done it. And we can clearly choose to reduce emissions of CO2, methane, etc if we wish.
You don't appear to have anything factual to state.

Yes, we can reduce emissions, the UK could theoretically reduce global CO2 by 2% of 4% of 0.04% (or 1/50th of 1/25th of 1/2500th) which mathematically would have zero chance of altering Earth's climate. The devastation to people's lives on the other hand would be almost unthinkable.

The climate doesn't require altering anyway, it's sustaining life more so than ever before.

deeps

4,961 posts

205 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
Randy Winkman said:
deeps said:
kerplunk said:
Not sure how denying AGW so as to avoid taking on the huge task of transitioning away from fossil fuels is having a backbone.

I like how he appears to be a believer in the solar-driven ice age ahoy idea though - nothing at all convenient and self-serving about that of course.

He's clearly of the same stripe as australian oil/mining geologist (and like Roberts a One Nation candidate) David Archibald who back in the noughties predicted massive solar-driven global cooling by 2020 (promoted on these pages by guess who!). Guess what - it never happened and global temps went in the opposite direction. Oh well that non-physics based cycle idea didn't work - but there's still plenty of eager to believe suckers around so let's ply it again!

Edited by kerplunk on Tuesday 2nd March 02:55
There's plenty of predictions of solar cooling ahead, obviously predicting timescales isn't easy and I think many underestimated the solar lag to climate 10-15 years ago. When you weigh it up, that's not a patch on all the failed warm side predictions though. There's no way warmists 15 years ago would have predicted or remotely believed the extreme low temperatures of this winter.

One thing's certain, now is not the time to be investing in solar and wind, with the potential for bitter winters ahead and increased energy demand, what a foolish policy which will cost lives. I don't trust politicians at all when it comes to keeping the lights on over then next few decades. Potential disaster in the making.
Don't you think there's a danger in getting a bit carried away about the cold weather earlier this winter? It's been positively balmy for a couple for weeks now in SE London and for today the BBC forecast for Inverness says 6 degrees, rising to 8 for the weekend. Where are the extreme low temperatures now?
Maybe you don't follow global temperatures? Or perhaps only watch the BBC? I'm talking about the brutally severe northern hemisphere winter of 20/21.

Sensei Rob

217 posts

43 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.

dickymint

19,309 posts

222 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................

kerplunk

4,893 posts

170 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
dickymint said:
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................
lol, it's a robotish gish gallop of standard denier talking points and conspiracy ideation. Good cramming though.

durbster

8,451 posts

186 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
dickymint said:
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................
Maybe Sensei Rob is simply new to the debate so doesn't know, but you have seen this collection of common talking points debunked countless times over the years. How can you be triumphant about somebody throwing out points that you know can be easily dismissed?

Sensei Rob

217 posts

43 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
kerplunk said:
dickymint said:
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................
lol, it's a robotish gish gallop of standard denier talking points and conspiracy ideation. Good cramming though.
Go on then....enlighten us with your theory on the cause of the Medieval warm period.

El stovey

37,944 posts

227 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
Sensei Rob said:
Go on then....enlighten us with your theory on the cause of the Medieval warm period.
It’s not “us” that needs enlightening.

Sensei Rob

217 posts

43 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
durbster said:
dickymint said:
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................
Maybe Sensei Rob is simply new to the debate so doesn't know, but you have seen this collection of common talking points debunked countless times over the years. How can you be triumphant about somebody throwing out points that you know can be easily dismissed?
Well perhaps you want to put your skills to the test. Assume if just a dude who only knows GCSE level science. So debunk the points I made:

1. Early Earth had higher CO2 levels.

2. The Medieval Warm period was not caused by humans, rather it occurred naturally.

3. CO2 makes plants grow bigger

4. We know have the technology to remove CO2 from the air and convert it back into fuel.

kerplunk

4,893 posts

170 months

Wednesday 3rd March
quotequote all
Sensei Rob said:
kerplunk said:
dickymint said:
Sensei Rob said:
It's much ado about nothing, really. All scaremongering to raise taxes.

Nobody is denying climate change (aka global warming). The issue is whether it's humans to blame or whether it's natural. Bear in mind, early Earth had much higher CO2 levels and still gave rise to life proves that we can't kill the Earth.

People ought to look into the Medieval warm period as a case study for climate change. Spoiler alert: it was great. It also happened before the Industrial revolution, meaning it's a total headscratcher for the likes of Greta who skipped too many days at school. Perhaps it's all caused by solar activity, after all.

CO2 is literally plant food. So, we can expect plants to grow bigger and bear more fruit. Deforestation is an issue that needs to be sorted out, for sure. Furthermore, if that's still not good enough, we now have the technology to literally extract CO2 from the sky and convert it into fuel.
Coming in here with your common sense tut tut! The Borg are preparing "your assimilation chamber" as I type ..................
lol, it's a robotish gish gallop of standard denier talking points and conspiracy ideation. Good cramming though.
Go on then....enlighten us with your theory on the cause of the Medieval warm period.
The MWP grew out of a very euro-centric view of the world. Looks like europe is warmer now, if not warmer than MWP. The concern isn't about being as warm as the MWP. It's about the potential for much more warming occuring in a very short space of time ie temperatures that would far exceed anything seen in the holocene arriving in what is in geological timeframes like the flick of a switch.


Edited by kerplunk on Wednesday 3rd March 10:02