Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 17:08:17 GMT
..and talking of nutshells, just over a hundred years ago what was imagineered to be a fossilised coconut shell was subsequently used to fool thousands of world scientists by combining it with bits of bone and teeth to form a skull known as The Piltdown Man; it took 40 years to destroy the myth: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_ManAnd I suppose that in your warped logic that is supposed to prove that all the climate scientists are wrong is it? Utterly laughable. Sometimes there really is no fool like an old fool.
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 24, 2023 17:21:46 GMT
..and talking of nutshells, just over a hundred years ago what was imagineered to be a fossilised coconut shell was subsequently used to fool thousands of world scientists by combining it with bits of bone and teeth to form a skull known as The Piltdown Man; it took 40 years to destroy the myth: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man And I suppose that in your warped logic that is supposed to prove that all the climate scientists are wrong is it?Utterly laughable. Sometimes there really is no fool like an old fool. It's to show that large numbers of scientists can be misguided. I think your second sentence is something the mods may show an interest in.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 24, 2023 18:06:06 GMT
So, we have now passed the 'no return' point and any further efforts are futile. She was trying to say we would have now just passed the point of no return yes. Far from all the scientists yet agree with her on that. But no sensible person thinks further efforts are futile. Because clearly the warmer it gets the more potential damage to our ecosystem. And the more greenhouse gasses we keep pumping out the warmer it will get. It really doesn't matter how warm it gets if we are doomed to a relatively short-term extinction. Of course this isn't a view backed by scientists - our point is that Thunberg is a vacuous flapping, attention seeking halfwit and the media is engaging in disinformation by giving her attention
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jun 24, 2023 20:18:35 GMT
I think that we need to face some facts at this stage:
1) Climate change will eventually destroy the planet, no question. The Earth is doomed. Eventually the Sun will expand until it consumes the Earth. Of course, we'll be long gone by then. 2) Current global climate change trends (if any) may or may not be man-made. In terms of timescales we really do have too small a statistical sample to say. 3) Even if current trends are man-made, we live in the UK which would be responsible for a miniscule fraction of any possible anthropogenic climate change, so major curbs to our lifestyles are wholly unwarranted and totally pointless. 4) My personal carbon footprint is tiny and mostly made up of travelling to work (which I mostly do on a motorcycle), so there is very little fat to trim and any curb to my lifestyle is wholly unwarranted and totally pointless.
I therefore conclude that the climate change zealots are either dim-witted or have other, likely totalitarian, motives.
So the self-styled “Believers” of either flavour can, with all due respect (which is precisely zero), do one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2023 21:36:31 GMT
I think that we need to face some facts at this stage: 1) Climate change will eventually destroy the planet, no question. The Earth is doomed. Eventually the Sun will expand until it consumes the Earth. Of course, we'll be long gone by then. 2) Current global climate change trends (if any) may or may not be man-made. In terms of timescales we really do have too small a statistical sample to say. 3) Even if current trends are man-made, we live in the UK which would be responsible for a miniscule fraction of any possible anthropogenic climate change, so major curbs to our lifestyles are wholly unwarranted and totally pointless. 4) My personal carbon footprint is tiny and mostly made up of travelling to work (which I mostly do on a motorcycle), so there is very little fat to trim and any curb to my lifestyle is wholly unwarranted and totally pointless. I therefore conclude that the climate change zealots are either dim-witted or have other, likely totalitarian, motives. So the self-styled “Believers” of either flavour can, with all due respect (which is precisely zero), do one. Risible codswallop masquerading as logic as usual. Of course the Sun is very slowly heating up. But it is a process that takes many hundreds of millions of years before it has much effect. About 5 billion years from now it will have become a red giant. Much sooner than that, though still a very long time by human standards, say several hundred million years our planet will be becoming uncomfortably hot for life as it is today. Somewhere between 1 and 2 billion years from now a runaway greenhouse effect will be triggered turning the planet into another hell hole like Venus. We are unlikely to be around at the time though or if we are evolution would have had time to change us into something very different. How do we know all this? Those much derided scientists of course. But the timescales involved are geological in scale and nothing for us to worry about. Current climate change trends are much more rapid, having increased on average globally by nearly 1.5C in less than two centuries. Science is based upon accurate measurements. If you think they are unproven you need to back that with rather more than your obvious desire not to believe it. This increase needs to be explained. The Suns output fluctuates up and down slightly but on average has not changed. Nor has there been increased or decreased levels of volcanism above or below the long term norm. The long term warming of the sun is so slow that it would take many millennia to even be measurable. What has been measured beyond reasonable doubt is that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have pretty much doubled in a couple of centuries. There has been no increase in the natural production of CO2 in that time. But human activities involving the burning of coal or oil have been pumping out millions of tonnes of CO2. It is thus scientifically undeniable that the increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are a result of human activity, ie a man made increase. Now some more basic science. CO2 is known to be a greenhouse gas, a well known property of a number of gasses. Another one, for example, is methane. Such gasses are transparent to visible light but opaque to infrared. Thus they tend to allow visible light in but when it hits a surface and is reflected back as infrared, ie heat, greenhouse gasses act to trap that heat in. The more greenhouse gasses in an atmosphere, the more heat is trapped in the atmosphere, and the warmer it gets. It is therefore scientifically obvious that a doubling of CO2 levels will lead to increases in global temperatures. It is inevitable. In the absence of any other measured natural mechanism, it is clear that that the warming that has been measured is due to the doubling of CO2 levels, and that these CO2 increases are man made. This makes the phenomenon of man made global warming a scientifically undeniable reality. You just need to follow the scientific logic. And join the dots. Further evidence that the warming is taking place is found in a measurable rise in sea levels and observable retreat of ice sheets almost everywhere. The evidence is in fact pretty obvious and very basic. Those denying scientific reality tend to be driven into conspiracy theory arguments, or else simply ignore the science and just doubt it anyway for no better reason than that they don't want to believe it. I do not want it to be true either. But I have a basic understanding of the science and like most intelligent people am prepared to face realty. And guess what? I tend to find learned scientists far more convincing than you and the rest of the usual suspects around here.
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Jun 25, 2023 6:13:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 25, 2023 6:23:20 GMT
Good to hear REAL scientists for a change and not bright young things shelf stackers views...
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 25, 2023 6:30:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 25, 2023 7:01:33 GMT
The world is a fecked up place, without doubt, I was listening to an old friend of mine yesterday saying there was untold billions ready to be invested in climate change policies, followed with Rishi sticking ÂŁ170 on everybody's already struggling bills as a green levy, the madness of it all John.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jun 25, 2023 7:28:11 GMT
I think that we need to face some facts at this stage: 1) Climate change will eventually destroy the planet, no question. The Earth is doomed. Eventually the Sun will expand until it consumes the Earth. Of course, we'll be long gone by then. 2) Current global climate change trends (if any) may or may not be man-made. In terms of timescales we really do have too small a statistical sample to say. 3) Even if current trends are man-made, we live in the UK which would be responsible for a miniscule fraction of any possible anthropogenic climate change, so major curbs to our lifestyles are wholly unwarranted and totally pointless. 4) My personal carbon footprint is tiny and mostly made up of travelling to work (which I mostly do on a motorcycle), so there is very little fat to trim and any curb to my lifestyle is wholly unwarranted and totally pointless. I therefore conclude that the climate change zealots are either dim-witted or have other, likely totalitarian, motives. So the self-styled “Believers” of either flavour can, with all due respect (which is precisely zero), do one. Those denying scientific reality tend to be driven into conspiracy theory arguments, or else simply ignore the science and just doubt it anyway for no better reason than that they don't want to believe it. I do not want it to be true either. But I have a basic understanding of the science and like most intelligent people am prepared to face realty. Does Thornburg's hysterical and alarmist stance and its massive amplification by the entire media also count as 'ignoring the science' or 'conspiracy theory'? Perhaps if it wasn't so evident that large parts of the establishment were exaggerating massively and engaging in abusive and politically motivated reasoning, a lot the political heat could be taken out of the issue and people would be less inclined to take hardened or unreasoned stances all around? We have now been through several decades of waves of alarmist, massively exaggerated catastrophic claims, all of which were relayed sympathetically by the media and , it seems, significant parts of the establishment. Yet you feel the probleim lies with people expressing doubts? Here is a question - who is funding Ms Thornburg to spend her days arsing about, talking complete nonsense?
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 25, 2023 7:41:40 GMT
Those denying scientific reality tend to be driven into conspiracy theory arguments, or else simply ignore the science and just doubt it anyway for no better reason than that they don't want to believe it. I do not want it to be true either. But I have a basic understanding of the science and like most intelligent people am prepared to face realty. Does Thornburg's hysterical and alarmist stance and its massive amplification by the entire media also count as 'ignoring the science' or 'conspiracy theory'? Perhaps if it wasn't so evident that large parts of the establishment were exaggerating massively and engaging in abusive and politically motivated reasoning, a lot the political heat could be taken out of the issue and people would be less inclined to take hardened or unreasoned stances all around? We have now been through several decades of waves of alarmist, massively exaggerated catastrophic claims, all of which were relayed sympathetically by the media and , it seems, significant parts of the establishment. Yet you feel the probleim lies with people expressing doubts? Here is a question - who is funding Ms Thornburg to spend he days arsing about, talking complete nonsense? The same ones who are funding labour. How nice of them to purchase a nice new labour HQ for smarmer their tool.
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 25, 2023 7:43:52 GMT
Does Thornburg's hysterical and alarmist stance and its massive amplification by the entire media also count as 'ignoring the science' or 'conspiracy theory'? Perhaps if it wasn't so evident that large parts of the establishment were exaggerating massively and engaging in abusive and politically motivated reasoning, a lot the political heat could be taken out of the issue and people would be less inclined to take hardened or unreasoned stances all around? We have now been through several decades of waves of alarmist, massively exaggerated catastrophic claims, all of which were relayed sympathetically by the media and , it seems, significant parts of the establishment. Yet you feel the probleim lies with people expressing doubts? Here is a question - who is funding Ms Thornburg to spend he days arsing about, talking complete nonsense? The same ones who are funding labour. How nice of them to purchase a nice new labour HQ for smarmer their tool. Are you sure they aren't funding all sides?
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jun 25, 2023 8:28:44 GMT
The same ones who are funding labour. How nice of them to purchase a nice new labour HQ for smarmer their tool. Are you sure they aren't funding all sides? Correctl just the loony woke left..Well done Sheepy there may be hope for you yet. Nah perhaps there isn't lol.
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jun 25, 2023 8:31:19 GMT
Are you sure they aren't funding all sides? Correctl just the loony woke left..Well done Sheepy there may be hope for you yet. Nah there isn't lol. Nah, I have never relied on hope Jonsky.
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jun 25, 2023 8:49:02 GMT
I'm going to accept you in good faith and make a note of this thread. That you fully agree that climate change is happening and that its man made. Your only complaint is that Greta Thumberg has a voice in it, which you consider to be our climate change spokesperson. Incidentally, how did you vote in my poll? Even after pages of posts you still deliberately make false claims . Then you post this nonsense about accepting me in good faith. As someone who whines about trolling ( even a little diatribe and discussion on a thread dedicated to it ) you seem to embrace it . Stop lying in a mind zone thread . How on earth is this trolling? Please feel free to report me. I notice you didn't say how you voted in the poll. Is that why you raised this faux anger, to avoid that?
|
|