Climate Change may not be a bad our best brains feared.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Who the fk knew?


www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/09/18/immediacy-t...

[Disco Infiltrator]

Eric Mc said:

If only the thread title was in English.

I'm sure you get the picture.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Sell Tesla shares and buy V8 shares.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

So for clarity - you do or don't believe it exists ?

No, I think it's an overblown load of nonsense.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

Disco Infiltrator said:

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

So for clarity - you do or don't believe it exists ?

No, I think it's an overblown load of nonsense.

This is exactly my point. I'm happy to believe the world may have warmed up very, very slightly over the last few hundred years. Your graph shows an increase in temps not Climate change, this is a thread about Climate Change


It is the supposed consequences of this warming that I find to be utterly unbelievable.

Which was the point made in the article I posted in my first post.

Edited by Disco Infiltrator on Wednesday 20th September 08:09

[Disco Infiltrator]

Homeopathy fan Prince Charles being fully on board doesn't exactly sell it to me either.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Colonial said:

mondeoman said:

No, really, I'm not. Read wickens post, in full, particularly the part I quoted, then read my response to that part.

The arrogance of "the smart ones (like me)" comment. Brilliant.

Science is data, not consensus. And the data is totally inconclusive, so the only consensus you can have is "we don't know".

The data is not "totally inconclusive". It's actually pretty conclusive. Which is why scientific consensus exists.

I have to look at the modelling for things like predicted coastal erosion modelling for storm surges from even minor sea level rise for 100 years into the future. It's not pretty.

I'd be over the moon if the current modelling is proved wrong. Great news. I'd be happy to say "yep I was wrong" but at the moment that is as scientifically robust as supporting homeopathy.

Did you not read the article I posted in my first post? Modelling has been proved wrong.

Even Roger Harrabin agreed on yesterday's PM, and put it down to a decrease in CO2 levels in the atmosphere, that there was very little chance of anything more than a 1.5C increase. Which is why I started this thread.


Have another from The Independent.


Have Scientists really admitted that Climate Change sceptics are right?


www.independent.co.uk/infact/climate-change-scepti...


There's none so blind and all that...

[Disco Infiltrator]

jet_noise said:

Much of your post, WoD, is reasoned. This however is tin-foil-conspiracy cobblers.
What you need to be asking is who is funding all the alarmist papers?
And why is there so much money available for them?

Well, the world's richest country is also our largest battery manufacturer.

China.

[Disco Infiltrator]

Isn't the planet still warming up after the last ice age?

[Disco Infiltrator]

Disco Infiltrator said:

jet_noise said:

Much of your post, WoD, is reasoned. This however is tin-foil-conspiracy cobblers.
What you need to be asking is who is funding all the alarmist papers?
And why is there so much money available for them?

Well, the world's richest country is also our largest battery manufacturer.

China.

Or possibly one of world's richest men.

Elon Musk.

Vested interest much?

[Disco Infiltrator]

grumbledoak said:

Quite.

And, rising sea level - be afraid! - in perspective:

Don't rising sea levels have more to do with what's on it (an ever increasing number of boats and ships etc, as the worlds's population grows and grows) and in it (dumping ground, ditto the ever growing population).