Another Heated Debate - Climate Change, Reality Or Propaganda?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Snelly
  • Start date Start date
I know nothing about climate change etc. I do know that what ever they are doing to the parts of china that I visit can not be sustainable for ever. The pollution is insane. The use of resources ditto. Be it fuel, building materials, metals, what ever. If India and brazil are the same, the world is going to run out of some pretty basic resources quite quickly.
 
Is this mainly opinion based?

Hi SR,
To be honest yes it is my opinion, but its an opinion based on research and an enthusiasm for the subject stretching many years, an enthusiasm first tweeked whilst studying for me degree.
The rate our climate is changing is virtually unprecedented,if you take away super volcanoes, flood basalts and asteroid impacts, and you ask the question. If none of these are responsible for the rapid rate of change, what is present today that wasn't present in the past ? The one answer that smacks you in the face is the human race and our consumption of the earths resources.
The subject of climate change is frankly too large and complex a subject for a golf forum, there's far more to it than burning fossil fuels and the release of co2, in fact the real monkey in the room is the melting of the perma frost and the warming of the oceans that could release the billions of tonnes of methane hydrates present, a far more destructive greenhouse gas than co2. But thats at least a whole other thread ;)

If your interested SR then i've found a good web site which will corroborate my co2 figures at least, and much more. I've tried to find one that most people would agree have no hidden agendas or axes to grind, so have a look at climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ .
If you have any specific questions ask away and i'll do me best :thup:..
 
in fact the real monkey in the room is the melting of the perma frost and the warming of the oceans that could release the billions of tonnes of methane hydrates present, a far more destructive greenhouse gas than co2.

I watched that program too :thup: ...and the one where they sank co2 to the bottom of the sea in 'ice rods'.
 
I watched that program too :thup: ...and the one where they sank co2 to the bottom of the sea in 'ice rods'.

There's also some good articles in nature magazine and on the usgs web site to name just two resourses.
Sobering reading :mmm:.
Lets hope the large energy companies get it right when they get round to exploiting this source of energy :mad:
 
One thing I can't get my head around is ....

We get a very hot/cold/wet day/week whatever and immediately we are told by the "experts" via the media that this was the hottest/coldest/wetist (sp) day/week whatever for (say)150 years.

All those years ago, what did they blame that exceptional weather event on?

And, how come it's taken those (say) 150 years of man made interference to the climate to get to the same level again?

Whilst I accept that we are causing damage to the planet, I do believe that the climate is changing mainly due to natural causes. It always has done and probably always will as our climate is governed predominately by the Sun.

Great excuse though for the government to fleece us again and again.

Heard today that energy bills will rise again over the next few years to pay for more wind farms and the like. Anyone know how much energy is used to make and install one wind generator compared to how much "free" energy it will produce over it's lifetime?

Rant over ......
 
Hi SR,
The rate our climate is changing is virtually unprecedented,if you take away super volcanoes, flood basalts and asteroid impacts, and you ask the question. If none of these are responsible for the rapid rate of change, what is present today that wasn't present in the past ?..

I believe if you look through the climatic changes over the last thousand years or so you will find there have been wide variations in temperature from Mini Ice Ages to very warm periods. Many believe the Sun's activity cycles are attuned to these changes.
 
there is no disputing the ice caps are melting at an accelerated rate over the last 20 years, these are facts, however, they cannot state categorically WHY this is happening which leaves the wriggle room for all and any theories.
 
It seems to me the vast majority of the experts, scientists that is, say it’s a man made problem. A minority view is that it isn’t or at best inconclusive. Is it wise to accept the minority view? I think not. Unless that is; the minority says something is harmful

Interesting perspective Shaun but don't forget there was a time when the world's brightest minds thought the world was flat and that the Sun went around the Earth. One of the greatest scientists of all time (Galileo) spent most of his life under house arrest because he allegedly criticised the Pope!
 
Interesting perspective Shaun but don't forget there was a time when the world's brightest minds thought the world was flat and that the Sun went around the Earth. One of the greatest scientists of all time (Galileo) spent most of his life under house arrest because he allegedly criticised the Pope!

I think science has come on a bit since the flat earth society and Galileo; it can be trusted a bit more today. The evidence in favour of manmade global warming is overwhelming. But there is a mass and powerful influence in the world, whose interest is to discredit and pour scorn on it. They are the fossil fuel barons of the oil, gas and coal multinational empires, who’s influence is all powerful

The nature of science has always been one of theory, based on probability and evidence and not always absolute proof. We have the evidence before us; I repeat point from my original post. Can we afford to gamble and ignore the weight of scientific opinion, in favour of a sceptical one?

Your call planet
 
I think science has come on a bit since the flat earth society and Galileo; it can be trusted a bit more today. The evidence in favour of manmade global warming is overwhelming. But there is a mass and powerful influence in the world, whose interest is to discredit and pour scorn on it. They are the fossil fuel barons of the oil, gas and coal multinational empires, who’s influence is all powerful

I

The nature of science has always been one of theory, based on probability and evidence and not always absolute proof. We have the evidence before us; I repeat point from my original post. Can we afford to gamble and ignore the weight of scientific opinion, in favour of a sceptical one?

Your call planet

I suggest you read Watermelons, the book I referenced in the first post. I think you would find it interesting.
 
Interesting perspective Shaun but don't forget there was a time when the world's brightest minds thought the world was flat and that the Sun went around the Earth. !

So what to say in 50/70 years time the next generation wont find out our current brightest minds were as wrong about climate change as they were about their findings ?
 
I suggest you read Watermelons, the book I referenced in the first post. I think you would find it interesting.
I’m not sure if will be rushing to Amazon to get the book. I have heard of it and its claims. The Author James Delingope is a well know rightwing columnist and novelist, Also a champion of Capitalist cause. So not surprising his defence of the oil barons hatred of environmentalists. I understand watermelons is derogatory term for them, Green on the outside but red in the middle

This is the guy who thinks the BBC are a Marxist organisation and sees red under every bed. A brilliant and influential writer he may be, but is not an environmental scientist
 
there is no disputing the ice caps are melting at an accelerated rate over the last 20 years, these are facts, however, they cannot state categorically WHY this is happening which leaves the wriggle room for all and any theories.

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.
 
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.
Given that they can't get the weather forecast right, what do you expect! My instincts are that there is or will be a problem. The only way for those at the 'working' level to get anything done - by those at the 'strategy' level - is to make such a fuss about it that it cannot be ignored - because ignoring it or rejecting it as hippy-ish is what the vested interests do, and they have huge resources to market their 'views' (look how long it took to fight the Tobacco industry!). The fact that there is so much 'negative' evidence with little on the 'positive' side worries me. However, I certainly don't believe that this year's peculiar weather, or last year's, or any other recent 'peculiar' stuff, is down to 'climate change'! It's a much slower process than that.
 
Top