|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 13, 2023 14:59:06 GMT
Oh look yet another perpetual motion promise. Note the story as as per usual comes from an EUSSR green site, Toyota announces new EV battery which could cut charging time to under 10 minutes
link |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 13, 2023 16:16:22 GMT
Still vague claims of tacit support from scientists. But no mention of the scientists who claim we face extinction If its not vague name the scientist who said we're all going to die? www.independent.co.uk/news/science/extinction-rebellion-protests-scientists-climate-change-london-amsterdam-a9154336.htmlThis says 400 scientists support the extinction rebellion protests. Nothing like your claim. Of course they support the protest they think we need to do something to prevent AGW reaching a climate tipping point which will be harder to reverse. No climatologist is saying climate change is OK don't worry about it. Do your work for you, no thanks. You made the claim, should be dead easy for you to back it up. So which one said we are all going to die? You seem to be treating concern about the damage AGW will cause with "We are all going to die" When you express concern about criminals entering this country, would you expect me to accuse you of saying "we are going to die" As in protest. Not |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 13, 2023 16:35:08 GMT
If its not vague name the scientist who said we're all going to die? www.independent.co.uk/news/science/extinction-rebellion-protests-scientists-climate-change-london-amsterdam-a9154336.htmlThis says 400 scientists support the extinction rebellion protests. Nothing like your claim. Of course they support the protest they think we need to do something to prevent AGW reaching a climate tipping point which will be harder to reverse. No climatologist is saying climate change is OK don't worry about it. Do your work for you, no thanks. You made the claim, should be dead easy for you to back it up. So which one said we are all going to die? You seem to be treating concern about the damage AGW will cause with "We are all going to die" When you express concern about criminals entering this country, would you expect me to accuse you of saying "we are going to die" As in protest. Not Of course we are all going to die. Its just the bumburgers who want to make our demise as painfull as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 13, 2023 19:00:43 GMT
If its not vague name the scientist who said we're all going to die? www.independent.co.uk/news/science/extinction-rebellion-protests-scientists-climate-change-london-amsterdam-a9154336.htmlThis says 400 scientists support the extinction rebellion protests. Nothing like your claim. Of course they support the protest they think we need to do something to prevent AGW reaching a climate tipping point which will be harder to reverse. No climatologist is saying climate change is OK don't worry about it. Do your work for you, no thanks. You made the claim, should be dead easy for you to back it up. So which one said we are all going to die? You seem to be treating concern about the damage AGW will cause with "We are all going to die" When you express concern about criminals entering this country, would you expect me to accuse you of saying "we are going to die" As in protest. Not I repeat the research the word 'extinction'. It does not mean we need to do something, it means we need to do something or we become extinct (aka " we are all going to die". You want the names, I gave you the numbers and just short of 400, some of whom are IPCC contributors, is a not an insignificant number. What was my claim that my link did not support? It would be interesting if you could provide some 'warmist' scientists who say it is not an emergency and do not support the 'we are all going to die' scenario. So far according to many there is a 97% consensus in climate science that AGW is an emergency situation, or is that wrong? An emergency situation if we do not take action ' we are all going to die'. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 13, 2023 19:14:25 GMT
I repeat the research the word 'extinction'. It does not mean we need to do something, it means we need to do something or we become extinct (aka " we are all going to die". You want the names, I gave you the numbers and just short of 400, some of whom are IPCC contributors, is a not an insignificant number. What was my claim that my link did not support? It would be interesting if you could provide some 'warmist' scientists who say it is not an emergency and do not support the 'we are all going to die' scenario. So far according to many there is a 97% consensus in climate science that AGW is an emergency situation, or is that wrong? An emergency situation if we do not take action ' we are all going to die'. I've seen primary school kids on the news with placards telling us we haven't got long to save the planet. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 13, 2023 19:48:05 GMT
I repeat the research the word 'extinction'. It does not mean we need to do something, it means we need to do something or we become extinct (aka " we are all going to die". You want the names, I gave you the numbers and just short of 400, some of whom are IPCC contributors, is a not an insignificant number. What was my claim that my link did not support? It would be interesting if you could provide some 'warmist' scientists who say it is not an emergency and do not support the 'we are all going to die' scenario. So far according to many there is a 97% consensus in climate science that AGW is an emergency situation, or is that wrong? An emergency situation if we do not take action ' we are all going to die'. Yes I understood a while back that you were trying to link a catchy protest logo "Extinction Rebellion" with scientists in a bid to back up your claim that scientists had said we are all going to die. So far you have given me 400 scientists who support the aims of extinction rebellion but not one saying we are all going to die. Now you want me to find you one who says its not an emergency as if by agreeing scientist think climate change is urgent is the equivalent of saying they said we are all going to die. tbh this is a dead end conversation. Yes scientist think climate change is very serious, yes its probable that if we continue to do nothing we may well drive many species to extinction. I don't think any scientist would expect humans to become extinct but there are states pretty bad before we reach extinction. That you don't think its serious is the real point you are making, but then why would you, you don't believe its happening. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 13, 2023 19:57:43 GMT
I repeat the research the word 'extinction'. It does not mean we need to do something, it means we need to do something or we become extinct (aka " we are all going to die". You want the names, I gave you the numbers and just short of 400, some of whom are IPCC contributors, is a not an insignificant number. What was my claim that my link did not support? It would be interesting if you could provide some 'warmist' scientists who say it is not an emergency and do not support the 'we are all going to die' scenario. So far according to many there is a 97% consensus in climate science that AGW is an emergency situation, or is that wrong? An emergency situation if we do not take action ' we are all going to die'. I've seen primary school kids on the news with placards telling us we haven't got long to save the planet. THis is reinforced by those repsonsible for disseminating information to teh public 2There is no huge chasm after a 1.49C rise, we are tumbling down a painful, worsening rocky slope rather than about to suddenly hit a sheer cliff edge – but by most standards the world’s governments are currently failing to avert a grim fate. “We are on a catastrophic path,” said António Guterres, secretary general of the UN. “We can either save our world or condemn humanity to a hellish future.” www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/oct/14/climate-change-happening-now-stats-graphs-maps-cop26Perhaps I should modify my comment to it is not 'we are all going to die' it is 'most of us are going to die'. Not much difference really |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 13, 2023 20:21:29 GMT
I repeat the research the word 'extinction'. It does not mean we need to do something, it means we need to do something or we become extinct (aka " we are all going to die". You want the names, I gave you the numbers and just short of 400, some of whom are IPCC contributors, is a not an insignificant number. What was my claim that my link did not support? It would be interesting if you could provide some 'warmist' scientists who say it is not an emergency and do not support the 'we are all going to die' scenario. So far according to many there is a 97% consensus in climate science that AGW is an emergency situation, or is that wrong? An emergency situation if we do not take action ' we are all going to die'. Yes I understood a while back that you were trying to link a catchy protest logo "Extinction Rebellion" with scientists in a bid to back up your claim that scientists had said we are all going to die. So far you have given me 400 scientists who support the aims of extinction rebellion but not one saying we are all going to die. Now you want me to find you one who says its not an emergency as if by agreeing scientist think climate change is urgent is the equivalent of saying they said we are all going to die. tbh this is a dead end conversation. Yes scientist think climate change is very serious, yes its probable that if we continue to do nothing we may well drive many species to extinction. I don't think any scientist would expect humans to become extinct but there are states pretty bad before we reach extinction. That you don't think its serious is the real point you are making, but then why would you, you don't believe its happening. This is supposed to be an area where reasoned debate exists. I find it quite incredible that I have to define 'extinction' (the fact or process of a species, family, or other group of animals or plants becoming extinct:) to try and progress a conversation. These scientists support 'extinction rebellion' with its view that the climate emergency will lead to ecological and social collapse unless actively addressed. They chose the word not me. If you are going to be pedantic and take 'we are all going to die' as a literal phrase as opposed to a phrase that indicates ecological and social collapse and serious consequences for mankind I will tailor my replies accordingly and gaun canny with the threat of pedantry uppermost in my mind. The real point I am making is that scientists and news broadcasters are actively trying to scare the bajessus out of the populace, especially children, and lying and deceit and overegging of the pudding is all grist to the mill to that end. You seem to think that lying by scientists and those that disseminate information is fine as it progresses the cause. It is the history of lies and failed predictions that tells the tale and I am unclear why you would ignore all of those failures and still put your trust in a 'settled science' that has repeatedly failed to accurately predict many thinsg in the last 30 years. It is not a case of not believing there may be a problem, it is a case of the solutions that are currently proposed will mean darker, meaner, colder, shallower and narrower lives for most people whilst others can still traverse the planet as harbingers of doom and as champions of saving planet earth. There is nothing wrong with finding a solution, there is everything wrong with the solutions being proposed. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 16, 2023 21:00:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 17, 2023 20:10:29 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2023 22:38:03 GMT
There are flaws at present with the concept of electric cars. They are far too expensive to buy, with too few charging points and no possible reliable home charging point for half the population. If your figures are accurate they represent further problems. Problem with you as always is your insistence upon relying on such an unreliable source for your information. I for one will not be reading it. The Daily Mail spouts so much absolute tosh that I do not regard any supposed information in as as reliable unless supported by a more reliable source. Your habit of treating it as if its the bible is one of the main reasons why I struggle to take your arguments seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jun 18, 2023 6:33:21 GMT
There are flaws at present with the concept of electric cars. They are far too expensive to buy, with too few charging points and no possible reliable home charging point for half the population. If your figures are accurate they represent further problems. Problem with you as always is your insistence upon relying on such an unreliable source for your information. I for one will not be reading it. The Daily Mail spouts so much absolute tosh that I do not regard any supposed information in as as reliable unless supported by a more reliable source. Your habit of treating it as if its the bible is one of the main reasons why I struggle to take your arguments seriously.If you had read the story you would see that the figures come from the RAC. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2023 6:47:13 GMT
There are flaws at present with the concept of electric cars. They are far too expensive to buy, with too few charging points and no possible reliable home charging point for half the population. If your figures are accurate they represent further problems. Problem with you as always is your insistence upon relying on such an unreliable source for your information. I for one will not be reading it. The Daily Mail spouts so much absolute tosh that I do not regard any supposed information in as as reliable unless supported by a more reliable source. Your habit of treating it as if its the bible is one of the main reasons why I struggle to take your arguments seriously.If you had read the story you would see that the figures come from the RAC. Fair enough. But if it had been a less notoriously unreliable publication I would have read the the story and spotted that. One of the modus operandi of the Mail is to quote selectively even from reliable sources, to give an unreliable and skewed picture. That doesn't mean that it has done so here. I myself recognise problems with electric cars. But its the lack of trust issue with me that prevents me reading the Mail. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 18, 2023 7:33:22 GMT
Of course that fact that some figures came from the RAC does not make the DM article accurate.
It is highly probable that the figures are quoted out of context to misrepresent the facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 18, 2023 9:43:50 GMT
Of course that fact that some figures came from the RAC does not make the DM article accurate. It is highly probable that the figures are quoted out of context to misrepresent the facts. Is that what has happened, that the RAC figures have been misused? |
|
