Jump to content

Lunatic eco-warrior


Manx Bean

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, thommo2010 said:

This was my thinking. 

 

I'm not up to speed with all of this but from what history shows is that it all seems to go in cycles.

Every 10,000 years or so. There's a timeline chart in the Museum of London showing the approx dates, evidenced by enviromental data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 206
  • Created
  • Last Reply
12 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

Every 10,000 years or so. There's a timeline chart in the Museum of London showing the approx dates, evidenced by enviromental data.

We're fucked anyway, Its just a handy way of taxing us a bit  (make that a lot) extra in the meantime!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manximus Aururaneus said:

Nonsense Science!

Mankind population is doubling every 50 years - it has doubled since Attenborough made his first documentary.

If , IF , Global warming cycles (natural cycles as they are), are accelerating due to the 'Man Made' element, then unless you address population explosion, GW initiatives are futile.

Simple arithmetic. End of.

There's little doubt that this is the main issue, the additional food production,  transport and power demands of the doubled population is the problem. Are we going to ask for voluntary liquidation of half of the population, have a series of massive nuclear strikes or release a killer superbug, any takers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Max Power said:

There's little doubt that this is the main issue, the additional food production,  transport and power demands of the doubled population is the problem. Are we going to ask for voluntary liquidation of half of the population, have a series of massive nuclear strikes or release a killer superbug, any takers?

Would "globalising" Coronation Street go some way towards reduced population. Whole nations' populations would be like Lemmings :flowers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Max Power said:

There's little doubt that this is the main issue, the additional food production,  transport and power demands of the doubled population is the problem. Are we going to ask for voluntary liquidation of half of the population, have a series of massive nuclear strikes or release a killer superbug, any takers?

If eco-warriers were really true their beliefs they would surely jump at the opportunity to volunteer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admire them for getting off their arses and demonstrating their right to protest. As things stand I believe that the current plan is to still fall under ECHR rulings post brexit.

"Taking back control...." :lol:

Unfortunately climate change will need a global effort to deal with iit.

Good luck with that one....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Max Power said:

I wouldn't ever suggest that we are not contributing to climate change and global warming me old China. We do, however, seem to be caught between multiple conflicting theories of the major cause? Many say that we are the major contributor, on the other hand we have equally eminent scientists telling us that it is mainly due to other causes, such as the sun going through a warming stage, also causing increased volcanic activity, which in turn affects atmospherics and air quality? Each side accuses the other of vested interests, mainly connected with our use of fossil fuels. One side wanting to break the oil cabbals which actually rule us, the other supporting them as it preserves our current way of life, for a while? Unfortunately we are faced with making our own decisions, or having decisions forced upon us, based on information which may or may not be totally true or accurate!    

Erm what to say in reply. 

My understanding is that the pace of change is the issue and there is a huge preponderance of evidence that humanity is the driver of this. 

Certainly there are natural cycles but these act on the scale of 10s of thousands of years.

Evidence of changes in the sun is very sparse, we’ve only had good data for two or three solar cycles and they show if anything a slight weakening of the sun - the last solar cycle had slightly fewer sun spots at solar maximum than previously. Detailed satellite measurement of top of the atmosphere radiation level is static or slightly deceasing and is totally uncorrelated with global warming.  

Without emissions of CO2 we would slowly be entering a cooling period but that is at a glacial pace as the Earth’s Orbital cycles and precession lower insolation into the North Pole. 

The increase in downward radiation from increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is multiple times larger than this and so these natural cycles are increasingly irrelevant. 

The properties of CO2 are well understood, unlike atmospheric oxygen  or nitrogen it absorbs radiation at a certain wave length and re-emits it.  As a result radiation which previously left the atmosphere is increasingly adsorbed and by random chance 1/2 of it re-emitted downwards warming the surface for a second time.

The Earth is a hugely complicated system but the simple truth of the properties of CO2 is the driving explanation of the changes in the Earth’s temperature.

Obviously ecological damage is far more than global warming and human population growth is causing untold damage but also demographic transition is a reality as the benefits of wealth and education spread.  The world population will peak at about 10 billion.  With care and the application of leapfrogging technology touchwood a balance can be found.

Decarbonising the economy is a vital first step but there’s much else to do too.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, woody2 said:

co2 levels have fallen...... yet the climate change nutter claim it's having a big impact......

:rolleyes:

i suppose the iom can finally have a ski slope during the next ice age......... 

CO2 levels fluctuate between the North hemisphere summer and winter as there is less land mass in the south, but the trend is ever upward. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chinahand said:

CO2 levels fluctuate between the North hemisphere summer and winter as there is less land mass in the south, but the trend is ever upward. 

 

:rolleyes:

Quote

The UK’s total CO2 emissions are currently 38% below 1990 levels and are now as low as emissions were back in 1890

:whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, P.K. said:

I admire them for getting off their arses and demonstrating their right to protest. As things stand I believe that the current plan is to still fall under ECHR rulings post brexit.

"Taking back control...." :lol:

Unfortunately climate change will need a global effort to deal with iit.

Good luck with that one....

that's labours plan......

still we can go back to burning coal like ze germans........maggie left a bit in the ground for the grandkids........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey woody

Quote

Anyone can provide a quote with no source to try and back up their stupid argument

To help you, the quote came from an article by Zeke Hausfather from a website funded by The European Climate Foundation. Surprised to see you using it really, seeing as according to you repeatedly Europeans are "scum". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chinahand said:

Erm what to say in reply. 

My understanding is that the pace of change is the issue and there is a huge preponderance of evidence that humanity is the driver of this. 

Certainly there are natural cycles but these act on the scale of 10s of thousands of years.

Evidence of changes in the sun is very sparse, we’ve only had good data for two or three solar cycles and they show if anything a slight weakening of the sun - the last solar cycle had slightly fewer sun spots at solar maximum than previously. Detailed satellite measurement of top of the atmosphere radiation level is static or slightly deceasing and is totally uncorrelated with global warming.  

Without emissions of CO2 we would slowly be entering a cooling period but that is at a glacial pace as the Earth’s Orbital cycles and precession lower insolation into the North Pole. 

The increase in downward radiation from increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is multiple times larger than this and so these natural cycles are increasingly irrelevant. 

The properties of CO2 are well understood, unlike atmospheric oxygen  or nitrogen it absorbs radiation at a certain wave length and re-emits it.  As a result radiation which previously left the atmosphere is increasingly adsorbed and by random chance 1/2 of it re-emitted downwards warming the surface for a second time.

The Earth is a hugely complicated system but the simple truth of the properties of CO2 is the driving explanation of the changes in the Earth’s temperature.

Obviously ecological damage is far more than global warming and human population growth is causing untold damage but also demographic transition is a reality as the benefits of wealth and education spread.  The world population will peak at about 10 billion.  With care and the application of leapfrogging technology touchwood a balance can be found.

Decarbonising the economy is a vital first step but there’s much else to do too.

 

 

 

 

World population to peak @about 10 Billion.

How so, source, evidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...