What to do about Human Induced Climate Change
Discussion
RobM77 said:
Likewise, climate change research shows a very clear message from the science
I agree with the extra layer added by meddling politicians, but my general point was that data can be interpreted in many ways, and if you operate in an environment where for whatever reason you believe that Hypothesis A is desirable and Hypothesis B is undesirable, you will head for A. The fuel of media, fashion and the curious modern need for everyone to have something to worry about does the rest. The politicians see the chance for publicity, to 'save the world' and guess what, raise taxes.AndrewEH1 said:
Ban consumption of beef and other red meats that cost so many resources to produce.
Ban Palm Oil.
Ban soya bean production due to the deforestation it is causing.Ban Palm Oil.
Tax this, tax that, the populace must be controlled and told what is good for them.
Instead how about lowering tax on LED lighting, for example, and having incentives for companies that produce light fittings designed to use LEDs rather than G9 capsule lamps etc.
With governments reluctant to invest in long term schemes like nuclear power why is it a surprise that ordinary people cannot see the point in buying things that will take 10 - 20 years to show a ROI?
Simpo Two said:
RobM77 said:
Likewise, climate change research shows a very clear message from the science
I agree with the extra layer added by meddling politicians, but my general point was that data can be interpreted in many ways, and if you operate in an environment where for whatever reason you believe that Hypothesis A is desirable and Hypothesis B is undesirable, you will head for A. The fuel of media, fashion and the curious modern need for everyone to have something to worry about does the rest. The politicians see the chance for publicity, to 'save the world' and guess what, raise taxes.RobM77 said:
Referring to it as an 'extra layer of meddling' infers that scientists...
I said 'meddling politicians'. Please try to (a) read (b) understand what I type. If you can't manage that you're in no position to philosophise on the finer points of climatology.I have no interest either way because even if it is true then there's precious little we can do about it so we should enjoy the ride and grow grapes
Simpo Two said:
RobM77 said:
Referring to it as an 'extra layer of meddling' infers that scientists...
I said 'meddling politicians'. Please try to (a) read (b) understand what I type. If you can't manage that you're in no position to philosophise on the finer points of climatology.I have no interest either way because even if it is true then there's precious little we can do about it so we should enjoy the ride and grow grapes
dudleybloke said:
When the 'elite' change their lifestyles to save the world the rest of us who might not have millions to spend on alternatives will listen and follow.
But while Al Gormless is still jetting between his air-conditioned mansions it doesn't show any sense of urgency.
If we all waited for everyone else to do something before we did it, nobody would ever do anything.But while Al Gormless is still jetting between his air-conditioned mansions it doesn't show any sense of urgency.
Einion Yrth said:
So what is the point? Before anyone can make any sane decisions as to what should be done about the rabid unicorn terrifying the residents of Golders Green we have to establish the existence of any such threat, surely?
Not sure Golders Green is a hotbed of climate activism. Did you perhaps mean Islington?ATG said:
dudleybloke said:
When the 'elite' change their lifestyles to save the world the rest of us who might not have millions to spend on alternatives will listen and follow.
But while Al Gormless is still jetting between his air-conditioned mansions it doesn't show any sense of urgency.
If we all waited for everyone else to do something before we did it, nobody would ever do anything.But while Al Gormless is still jetting between his air-conditioned mansions it doesn't show any sense of urgency.
dudleybloke said:
ATG said:
It's not evidence of lies. Hypocrisy of some individuals, perhaps.
Add the fact that everything they said would happen by now hasn't happened and it looks like lies meant to control us.Just like religion.
dudleybloke said:
ATG said:
It's not evidence of lies. Hypocrisy of some individuals, perhaps.
Add the fact that everything they said would happen by now hasn't happened and it looks like lies meant to control us.Just like religion.
I think the first thing to do would be to work out what is the correct temperature for the Earth and how much CO2 is also normal
At least then we have a number to work to
I suggest a temperature of 1.5C higher than now
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-optimal-temperat...
And CO2 less than 4000ppm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Ea...
And the reason for these figures, because my guess is as good as anyone else's
At least then we have a number to work to
I suggest a temperature of 1.5C higher than now
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-optimal-temperat...
And CO2 less than 4000ppm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Ea...
And the reason for these figures, because my guess is as good as anyone else's
RobM77 said:
dudleybloke said:
ATG said:
It's not evidence of lies. Hypocrisy of some individuals, perhaps.
Add the fact that everything they said would happen by now hasn't happened and it looks like lies meant to control us.Just like religion.
1.1 How many glaciers are going to melt?
a). None.
b). 1.
c). All.
1.2 And in what timescale?
a). Never.
b). 1000 years.
c). 30 years.
2 How many times has Professor Wadhams predicted Arctic ice disappearing?
a). Never.
b). Once.
c). 3 times.
3. What did Dr Viner suggest about snow?
a). Lovely fluffy stuff, picturesque, eat my skis.
b). Arrgh, blizzard.
c). Children will just not know what it is.
I got bored, sea level rise accelerating anyone?
regards,
Jet
Yesterday was interesting. First the main item on the lunchtime news was Climate Change! Good heavens, I thought, the BBC has run out of stuff to broadcast. It lasted about 10 minutes and told us all about how 2016 was the warmest year on record. Personally I rather enjoyed the warmth.
But the fact we were all going to drown had vanished by the evening news. And then social media news was leading with the fact that CO2 emissions had levelled off and everything was going to be OK after all.
Phew that was close. The world saved in an afternoon.
The other story, that ran onto both bulletins and so even more important, told us how bad using a phone while driving is. So no actual news at all, just social conditioning. Soon the lead story will be 'Eat more fruit'.
But the fact we were all going to drown had vanished by the evening news. And then social media news was leading with the fact that CO2 emissions had levelled off and everything was going to be OK after all.
Phew that was close. The world saved in an afternoon.
The other story, that ran onto both bulletins and so even more important, told us how bad using a phone while driving is. So no actual news at all, just social conditioning. Soon the lead story will be 'Eat more fruit'.
RobM77 said:
Gosh, you're paranoid! What are these things that 'they' said would happen? And who are 'they'?
Dr David Viner said that snow would be a rare and exciting thing by now yet I saw some just last week and didn't get excited at all.https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/12/one-of-the-...
The UN said that by 2010 there would be 50 million climate refugees in the world, that's 50 million people displaced from their homes by real and obvious changes to the environment.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/oct/1...
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disa...
The State of Victoria in Australia spent something like $1 Billion dollars building desalination plants because the droughts they would be experiencing now meant it was the only viable option for fresh water. They've now been mothballed.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/b...
Residents of Florida and other Southern US states have seen their hurricane insurance go up because they were told the frequency and intensity of hurricanes would go up, it's now been 10 years since a category 3 hurricane made landfall in the US.
http://www.tbo.com/weather/no-hurricanes-but-flori...
It seems to me that the only thing scientists have learnt about this subject in recent years is not to make predictions that will occur within our lifetimes hence why all the predictions now are about stuff that will happen in 50 years time.
jurbie said:
<snip>
It seems to me that the only thing scientists have learnt about this subject in recent years is not to make predictions that will occur within our lifetimes hence why all the predictions now are about stuff that will happen in 50 years time.
Clive James named this process. The Himey, the Jaime or something like that?It seems to me that the only thing scientists have learnt about this subject in recent years is not to make predictions that will occur within our lifetimes hence why all the predictions now are about stuff that will happen in 50 years time.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff