craggy_steve Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 20 hours ago, Derek Flint said: I had a thought today (and had a lie down after) Without confining the concept to these shores, of fuel duty was doubled, and auditably ringfenced to be spent only on emissions reduction, how would people feel about it? my own view; I’d use my vehicles less, public transport more, and be glad to see something that catalysed change. Man Made Emissions & Climate Change are not necessarily related, they might be, but the Earth has been much warmer in the past, before man. The recent rise in CO2 is absolutely measurable, its contribution to Climate Change is hypothesis. All the hypothetical bullshit apart, would it be a good idea to reduce emissions and fossil fuel use? Obviously yes. Wouldn't it be fantastic if mankind could largely use renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels? Obviously yes. Put all that money into converting our houses to collect solar power for electricity, use solar water heating, air / ground source heating etc. - wonderful. I'd pay a tarif for that. Would even absorb some of the supposed excess warmth and reduce CO2 emissions. Wouldn't necessarily stop climate change and the current phase of climate change might wipe us all out irrespective of man-made emissions, but at least it would be responsible stewardship. Put a single penny into the bad science propaganda industry which is attempting to persuade us that man made emissions are responsible for the current climate change trends just because CO2 has risen recently, instead of finding provable facts which explain both historic climate change (provably not driven by CO2) and current climate change, and I'll resent it. We need to reduce fossil fuel usage. We probably need to curb population growth. Because we each use the earth's resources and some of them are very finite and using them less / more slowly is common sense. I'll extend your idea beyond fuels. Do you need a new snazzy sports car. which needs lots of finite resources to make? Or could you get by with the simpler driving pleasure of a well maintained 25 year old MX5? Or a new HiFi, or a new ..... Man made emissions are a by-product of human waste & greed. The recent rise in CO2 levels mirrors the recent rise in human population. Politically unacceptable truth, the graphs look the same. A hypothesis that the recent rise in CO2 is proportional to, and caused by, the recent growth in human population cannot be challenged - there might be other reasons but the correlation between the two phenomena is compelling. So we need to stop growing the population, or reduce the amount of Earth's finite resources consumed by each human, or both. Climate change might still kill off mankind whatever we do, climate change and global warming have happened before, before man, without elevated levels of CO2, but at least if we were responsible stewards of out planet we would not have brought it upon ourselves. /rant over/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manximus Aururaneus Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 2 hours ago, craggy_steve said: Man Made Emissions & Climate Change are not necessarily related, they might be, but the Earth has been much warmer in the past, before man. The recent rise in CO2 is absolutely measurable, its contribution to Climate Change is hypothesis. All the hypothetical bullshit apart, would it be a good idea to reduce emissions and fossil fuel use? Obviously yes. Wouldn't it be fantastic if mankind could largely use renewable energy sources instead of fossil fuels? Obviously yes. Put all that money into converting our houses to collect solar power for electricity, use solar water heating, air / ground source heating etc. - wonderful. I'd pay a tarif for that. Would even absorb some of the supposed excess warmth and reduce CO2 emissions. Wouldn't necessarily stop climate change and the current phase of climate change might wipe us all out irrespective of man-made emissions, but at least it would be responsible stewardship. Put a single penny into the bad science propaganda industry which is attempting to persuade us that man made emissions are responsible for the current climate change trends just because CO2 has risen recently, instead of finding provable facts which explain both historic climate change (provably not driven by CO2) and current climate change, and I'll resent it. We need to reduce fossil fuel usage. We probably need to curb population growth. Because we each use the earth's resources and some of them are very finite and using them less / more slowly is common sense. I'll extend your idea beyond fuels. Do you need a new snazzy sports car. which needs lots of finite resources to make? Or could you get by with the simpler driving pleasure of a well maintained 25 year old MX5? Or a new HiFi, or a new ..... Man made emissions are a by-product of human waste & greed. The recent rise in CO2 levels mirrors the recent rise in human population. Politically unacceptable truth, the graphs look the same. A hypothesis that the recent rise in CO2 is proportional to, and caused by, the recent growth in human population cannot be challenged - there might be other reasons but the correlation between the two phenomena is compelling. So we need to stop growing the population, or reduce the amount of Earth's finite resources consumed by each human, or both. Climate change might still kill off mankind whatever we do, climate change and global warming have happened before, before man, without elevated levels of CO2, but at least if we were responsible stewards of out planet we would not have brought it upon ourselves. /rant over/ Ah, common sense at last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 5 hours ago, manxman1980 said: I have not seen any "rift". Perhaps a few outliers but I have not heard a credible scientist step forward and say that climate change is an entirely natural process and that human activity has had no impact. Happy to change my view if you can provide a link. It also does not take away from the evidence that we are destroying the environment in hundreds of different ways such as destroying the rain forest, polluting the oceans, contaminating water sources through chemicals and leachate. There's plenty of stuff around but to be fair, I am not qualified to judge the eminence of any particular scientist from either side of the argument... https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJR Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 I have just fast forwarded to the end of the subject.I will say though that if the same clowns that have told us that we will die due to Nuclear War SARS a new ice age Global Warming AIDs The hole in the ozone layer Bird Flu and one that I cannot remember are allowed in charge then it is time to give up.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxdaleliberationfront Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 Hell must have frozen over because among other things I am agreeing with Stu Peters and Max Power, There is no climate emergency. The saying 'climate change is man made' is partly true, it's a conspiracy theory concocted by a load of halfwits, lead by a 15 year old Swedish child who has been exploited by her parents for publicity and personal gain - a very sad story. The reason there are 10,000 (or 100,000 to even 100,000,000) scientists churning out all of these alarmist reports is that it's what pays their bills. It's the current vogue among the scientific community,. Possibly not since the 1590's have we lived in times when scientists are castigated because they dare to disagree with the mainstream way of thinking. In the 1980's we were all warned about the forthcoming ice age, now we're being warned about a warming planet but with no real story on what is warming and when and by how much. The Earth has been in a greenhouse state for about 85% of its history, it really is nothing to worry about. Although I do worry about the mental health of the young people and children who are being indoctrinated by the Climate Extremists. The anxiety that it must cause them to be told the planet is dying and humanity is to blame can be doing them no good whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Peters Posted November 27, 2019 Share Posted November 27, 2019 I know Foxy - I was thinking exactly the same thing when I read your earlier post. But as old Nic said 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. On climate anyway - I'm sure we'll be back to daggers drawn otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 There is a surprising amount of good sense in this thread. It's not really about climate change per se. It's more about the human condition. We couldn't have grown the global population eightfold in little more than a century without burning fossil fuel, and there is no way we can sustain that still growing population or anything like it, let alone give them all a sophisticated lifestyle, without continuing to burn fossil fuel. The planet's resources are finite and our voracious greed for them is unsustainable. Something has to give. That something will eventually be us. Like the dinosaurs, everything has its time and we are no exception. We won't change our ways in any appreciable way. We are not even at "peak oil" on the planet, yet we have a fantasy about countries being carbon neutral by 2050. Dream on. Nature will be the arbiter. Be thankful that you lived in a time of plenty, because there ain't a darned thing you can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 7 hours ago, woolley said: Nature will be the arbiter. Be thankful that you lived in a time of plenty, because there ain't a darned thing you can do. The people eating out of food banks will not go hungry after eating that slice of wisdom pie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butterflies Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 10 hours ago, foxdaleliberationfront said: There is no climate emergency. The saying 'climate change is man made' is partly true, it's a conspiracy theory concocted by a load of halfwits, lead by a 15 year old Swedish child who has been exploited by her parents for publicity and personal gain - a very sad story. The reason there are 10,000 (or 100,000 to even 100,000,000) scientists churning out all of these alarmist reports is that it's what pays their bills. It's the current vogue among the scientific community,. Possibly not since the 1590's have we lived in times when scientists are castigated because they dare to disagree with the mainstream way of thinking. Plot idea: 97% of the world’s scientists contrive an environmental crisis but are exposed by a plucky band of billionaires & oil companies.* Climate change denying isn't even a thing any more. Over a thousand Governments, jurisdictions and countries have declared a climate emergency, including the IOM, the UK, Canada, Portugal, France, Spain, the Pope and many, many others. Over 10,000 scientists from 150 countries have recently signed a declaration published in Bioscience stating: "We declare clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency. To secure a sustainable future, we must change how we live. This entails major transformations in the ways our global society functions and interacts with natural ecosystems." But no doubt Stu Peters and his ilk know best and the scientists are lying, right?! Jesus wept. (*stolen, not mine) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 35 minutes ago, Butterflies said: Plot idea: 97% of the world’s scientists contrive an environmental crisis but are exposed by a plucky band of billionaires & oil companies.* Even wackier plot development. The scientists decide that they can reverse it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 43 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said: The people eating out of food banks will not go hungry after eating that slice of wisdom pie. Nice virtue signal but if you are eating out of a food bank you are doing pretty well compared to the sort of global apocalypse we are discussing. Everything is relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 15 hours ago, Stu Peters said: That's a very imperious attitude. YouTube is like any other medium, you choose what to believe. Watch some Tony Heller videos and tell me what facts or deductions you take issue with (apart from his smarmy voice). I take issue with his lack of credentials and qualifications relevant to the subject matter. His own blog clearly states that he has a Bachelors Degree in Geology and a Masters in Electrical Engineering. I cannot find any record of him having published any peer reviewed papers on the subject either so please excuse me if I take a YouTube video with some scepticism. Are you sure you would not like to learn more about how Humans and Dinosaurs co-existed? 12 hours ago, Max Power said: There's plenty of stuff around but to be fair, I am not qualified to judge the eminence of any particular scientist from either side of the argument... https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/30000-scientists-reject-climate-change/ So why try? The snopes link points out that the petition call on anyone with an undergraduate degree in a science to sign it. Rather devalues that don't you think? The Forbes article seems more focused on ensuring that we continue to use fossil fuels. Can't help but feel there must be a reason behind that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, woolley said: Nice virtue signal but if you are eating out of a food bank you are doing pretty well compared to the sort of global apocalypse we are discussing. Everything is relative. Okay boomer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 22 minutes ago, RIchard Britten said: Okay boomer... Plenty of boomers use food banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIchard Britten Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, woolley said: Plenty of boomers use food banks. The irony of which seems to be lost on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.