Another Heated Debate - Climate Change, Reality Or Propaganda?

[Foxholer]

I think that technology will save us over the next 20/30yrs regardless of what's happening.

Now that really IS a leap of faith!:mmm:

 

[Foxholer]

Antartica has actually grown in recent times. The Ice in the North Pole has reduced in the Oceanic part but not over Greenland, it has increased in depth over the landed areas.

Apparently incorrect!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20543483

 

[williamalex1]

I think that technology will save us over the next 20/30yrs regardless of what's happening.

and a new god called technology is born .praise the tech

 

[HughJars]

Of course "climate change" is a reality, it's always changed, and always will.

The question is, are all these measures we get from the governments of the world about anything other than back door taxes? That is an entirely different story.

Over the last 30 years we've been expected to believe we were about to enter the next ice age, then it was "global warming", and when that proved to be an incorrect model, we now have "change", because no matter whta happens, the scientists and tax gatherers will be right.

The biggest con in history.

 

[SocketRocket]

Of course "climate change" is a reality, it's always changed, and always will.

The question is, are all these measures we get from the governments of the world about anything other than back door taxes? That is an entirely different story.

Over the last 30 years we've been expected to believe we were about to enter the next ice age, then it was "global warming", and when that proved to be an incorrect model, we now have "change", because no matter whta happens, the scientists and tax gatherers will be right.

The biggest con in history.

Yes, it's interesting how 'Global Warming' suddenly became 'Climate Change'

 

[walshawwhippet]

I suggest you read Watermelons, the book I referenced in the first post. I think you would find it interesting.

A question for you Snelly.
What qualifications does the writer, broadcaster that is James Delingpole have that justifies him attacking the integrity, knowledge of some of the worlds leading climate scientists ?
Indeed in his own words he does'nt do science.

 

[walshawwhippet]

Antartica has actually grown in recent times. The Ice in the North Pole has reduced in the Oceanic part but not over Greenland, it has increased in depth over the landed areas. As the South Pole sits over a Continent it is not so affected by the change in Ocean temperatures and has no effects from the likes of the Gulf Stream.

All this points to a rise in Ocean temperature, especially in the Northern hemisphere. I dont believe the rise in sea temperature is proven to be a result of raised CO2 levels in the atmosphere. I also believe statistics show that the Earths temperature has not warmed at all in the past 15 years.

The problem seems to be that a number of 'Experts' on climate dont seem to be able to agree on what is happening. They seem to be cherry picking data to prop up their personal beliefs and opinions. My own gut instinct tends to go against the prophets of Doom, they have scared us all witless so many times of late with false predictions of impending doom.

This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:

 

[Snelly]

A question for you Snelly.
What qualifications does the writer, broadcaster that is James Delingpole have that justifies him attacking the integrity, knowledge of some of the worlds leading climate scientists ?
Indeed in his own words he does'nt do science.

Read it and you'll find out chap.

 

[Snelly]

Apparently incorrect!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20543483

I wouldn't believe the BBC environment department if they told me that I had a hole in my backside. The whole organisation is institutionally socialist.

 

[Snelly]

This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:

See my original post. It is not the whole scientific community. Just the ones that can get baubles and dollars from the climate change industry.

 

[bluewolf]

See my original post. It is not the whole scientific community. Just the ones that can get baubles and dollars from the climate change industry.

As opposed to the ones who can get baubles and dollars from the fossil fuel and right wing lobbyists. It's a pointless argument anyway. No one is going to change their mind and people are only going to listen to arguments they already subscribe to. History will tell us who was right, and I hope for the sake of my kids that its the man made sceptics.

 

[walshawwhippet]

See my original post. It is not the whole scientific community. Just the ones that can get baubles and dollars from the climate change industry.

To paraphrase someone you may have heard of Snelly(Sir Paul Nurse) lets talk about "consensus".
If, god forbid you are one day diagnosed to be suffering from cancer and the general consensus of the worlds leading oncologists is that this or that is the best regumine to achieve a favouable outcome. Do you (A) take their advice, trusting in their expertise, or (B) lie under a pyramid hoping for the best? After all, all scientist are left wing loonies intent on ruining my profit margins.
It may not be all the scientific community Snelly, but its certainly the major CONSENSUS.

For those interested search bbc horizon for paul nurse/james delingpole.
I believe mr delingpole complained to the bbc later for being "intellectually raped" by mr nurse. Interesting phrase "intellectually raped".

Mr Delingpole is an ultra right wing libitarian concervative with absolutly no scientific qualification of any kind, who has managed to find an audience of like minded right wingers who read the telegraph.
"There is simply no evidence for a left wing conspiracy to over-tax, over regulate the populace to make us all poorer.Whereas there is an abundance of evidence for a right wing agenda to under tax, under regulate industry, to make a few much richer.

The only people really interested in baubles and dollors Snelly, are Mr Delingpole and his accolites.

 

[walshawwhippet]

I wouldn't believe the BBC environment department if they told me that I had a hole in my backside. The whole organisation is institutionally socialist.

I don't agree with you and i doubt Mr Patton would either. But even if you were correct what does a persons politics have to do with his scientific integrity? Can only right wingers be trusted to tell the truth? That worked with the bankers didn't it.

 

[SocketRocket]

This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:

Have the manners to explain what was incorrect with my comments. To say "This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time." is a crude statement, to which I would suggest is unworthy of you.

Comment on whether ice in parts of Antartica are growing.

Comment on my point that it is sea ice that is predominantly melting.

Comment on my point that Ocean temperatures are rising and explain the proof that CO2 emissions are causing this.

Comment on my statement that the Earths temperature has not risen in the last 15 years.

Comment on my point that the Experts on climate change do not all agree on the causes.

You dont need to comment on my gut feelings as they are personal to me.

Did I suggest that the Global scientific community are involved in a conspiracy? Well did I? I suggested they are cherry picking data to prop their personal beliefs, this happens all the time with 'scientific experts' If we took what they said without question we would all have been wiped out by SARS, Bird Flu, AIDS, BSE etc, the Millenium Bug would have wrought disaster on humanity.

I welcome a constructive reply but dont bother if it's another rant.

 

[SocketRocket]

This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:

I replied twice to this post with a reasoned reply but both have not been posted. Can someone explain why?

 

[bluewolf]

I replied twice to this post with a reasoned reply but both have not been posted. Can someone explain why?

Maybe it's the Socialists???

 

[ScienceBoy]

Climate change is happening and it is natural. Everything is striving for equilibrium across physics and chemistry, across out planet and the universe. As with "electronic overshoot" a decreasing amplitude wave usually plots the progress to equilibrium. In the case of climate change it is often described as a series of thresholds which boarder periods of extreme highs and lows (relatively).

A CO2 rich earth is a haven for plants, this is how it was billions of years ago. Their prevalence for such a long time contributed to a massive climate change over the next few billions of years.

What is important is that we have accelerated things by doing what ancient earth did and add lots of CO2 to the atmosphere before the "time of plants".

We must adapt as a species to the changing environment, the accelerated change we are bringing about. Continuing as we are is only going to lead to mass starvation. Just look at any population model for any species kept in a closed environment, once the population exceeds what can be sustained the population crashes as disease and starvation steps in.

I have a LOT to say on this subject, if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask.

 

[SocketRocket]

Climate change is happening and it is natural. Everything is striving for equilibrium across physics and chemistry, across out planet and the universe. As with "electronic overshoot" a decreasing amplitude wave usually plots the progress to equilibrium. In the case of climate change it is often described as a series of thresholds which boarder periods of extreme highs and lows (relatively).

A CO2 rich earth is a haven for plants, this is how it was billions of years ago. Their prevalence for such a long time contributed to a massive climate change over the next few billions of years.

What is important is that we have accelerated things by doing what ancient earth did and add lots of CO2 to the atmosphere before the "time of plants".

We must adapt as a species to the changing environment, the accelerated change we are bringing about. Continuing as we are is only going to lead to mass starvation. Just look at any population model for any species kept in a closed environment, once the population exceeds what can be sustained the population crashes as disease and starvation steps in.

I have a LOT to say on this subject, if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask.

Very good post. Thank you.

I do think that most of the planets problems would be lessened by a reduction in human population.

 

[rosecott]

I do think that most of the planets problems would be lessened by a reduction in human population.

Will you be drawing up a list of names.

 

[SocketRocket]

Will you be drawing up a list of names.

Thats a bit strong!! Did I suggest that we should start exterminating. I was more considering birth control or that Nature will find a way of dealing with it if we dont.