coppercrutch Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 20,000 , Thats your 8 bedroom Granton mansion gone CC Please no more links to stats and graphs with wavy lines to support your point of view , just make your point PLEASE i Cant be the only one that is being driven round the bend with your endless repetitive posting of the same viewpoint Just gonnie no Not my fault if you can't understand. Pretty simple really. I will give it to you in the simplest terms: The World's temperature will always change whether we are involved to not. You get it yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bindy Badgy Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I'm no expert but as far as I can tell from the limited reading that I have done the majority of the experts say that man made climate change is a reality and that's good enough for me. I don't understand the situation fully and I'm happy to leave analysis of the available evidence to those that know what they are doing: http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11654 The fact is that there is an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community about global warming and its causes. There are some exceptions, but the number of sceptics is getting smaller rather than growing. Even the position of perhaps the most respected sceptic, Richard Lindzen of MIT, is not that far off the mainstream: he does not deny it is happening but thinks future warming will not be nearly as great as most predict. Of course, just because most scientists think something is true does not necessarily mean they are right. But the reason they think the way they do is because of the vast and growing body of evidence. A study in 2004 looked at the abstracts of nearly 1000 scientific papers containing the term "global climate change" published in the previous decade. Not one rejected the consensus position. One critic promptly claimed this study was wrong – but later quietly withdrew the claim. Further more it appears that the skeptics have rather dodgy motives: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18524861.500-meet-the-global-warming-sceptics.html Most of the prominent organisations making the case against mainstream climate science have an avowed agenda of promoting free markets and minimal government. They often accept funding from the fossil-fuel industry. Few employ climate scientists. However, I do agree with some of what Coppercrutch has said. A lot of the measures taken appear to serve no cause whatsoever apart from raising cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYC-Hearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 The earth warming has nothing or very little to do with is. : Eh? The vast majority of empiricial studies show that human activities have had, and will continue to have, a significant impact on mean temperatures. While there is less consensus with respect to the scope and/or severity of this impact, there is an impact. Having some familiarity with the studies, I fear that this impact will be catastrophic. Positive feedback, alas, is a bitch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badly drawn boy Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Not my fault if you can't understand. Pretty simple really. I will give it to you in the simplest terms: The World's temperature will always change whether we are involved to not. You get it yet.... Your style doesnt change CC -Same retort each time You dont get it as is the norm -im not ridiculing your content Your childlike style of posting with these ridiculous graphs and links your obsessed with to back up your point , means i dont even bother reading Do you get that :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYC-Hearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 The World's temperature will always change whether we are involved to not. No one denies that. The issue is that natural changes in mean temperatures are being accelerated by unnatural forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 You talking about the UK 150 years ago. I can see why the 'east' would get ****ed of with us telling them what to do. After we have done it ourself !! It is a but like the whole Iran Nuclear situation. You can see the reason behind it however it does not stand up to any degree of 'fairness'. IMO. That's a pretty fair comparison, yes - kinda like the white man's burden, circa 2008. I can totally understand why China, India et al will tell us to get stuffed - but it's going to look pretty odd if the West suddenly goes all environmental while the East carries on belching its way through fossil fuels nineteenth century Britain style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpie Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 I find it hard to deny climate change, it does seem obvious that this cyclical entity is occurring. What I cannot stand is the futile and contradictory efforts that are being put in place to reduce global warming. In B.C. we have been hit with a carbon tax, at the same time it was implemented the Provincial government sent everyone with an address in B.C. a cheque for $100. This came to a cost of four hundred million dollars. The same government whilst spending literally billions on a light rapid transit system are also going to build more highways and bridges to facilitate vehicle traffic. One would think that one of these should be abandoned to facilitate the other. However if you reduce the number of vehicles not only do you reduce carbon emissions you also reduce the ammount of taxes from them, hence the highways and bridges, and we say politicians are stupid. I drive an SUV, probably the most attacked vehicle by global warming opponents, but little is said about the big dump truck, or eighteen wheeler spewing noxious fumes all over the place. And for my final rant, how many have watched a launch of a shuttle and been bemused by the clouds of smoke and other s--t exuded from the boosters etc, to get this thing through the ozone layer which at one time the weakening of which was the cause of all our problems. Thanks very much for starting this thread, I was having a real nice day, now I am going to go out with a baseball bat and demolish my neighbours Hummer:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Eh? The vast majority of empiricial studies show that human activities have had, and will continue to have, a significant impact on mean temperatures. While there is less consensus with respect to the scope and/or severity of this impact, there is an impact. Having some familiarity with the studies, I fear that this impact will be catastrophic. Positive feedback, alas, is a bitch... Significant ? 18,000 years ago (A mere second in terms of the World's history) much of the UK was covered by over a mile of ice. A few hundred thousand years ago the English channel was a marshland with Rhinos roaming free. Do a bit of research and find out what most of the World's eminent scientists were concerned about 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't global warming... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 The reason is because, IMO, they have realised they can make money out of it. Same as, same as... As for your second points I totally agree. I think we should be doing a lot more for the Environment and using resources far more efficiently. We treat this World like **** most of the time and we deserve all we get in return. I agree with many of the actions we are 'supposed' to take. However the reasons given for it are simply false. My favourite is the Persil/Ariel? advert with all the 'clicks'. Where they tell you at the end 'we can all help turn the World's temperature down'*. I have not seen it for a while. I imagine it was complained about. Pure tosh. Turning the World's temperature down !!! *Wording may not be exact. Good God. I haven't seen that advert - but for heavens sake! I'm reminded of the anti-marijuana ads on US TV in late 2001 - when they had the brass neck to suggest that if you wanted to buy a joint, you were "giving money to Osama"... Fair play to you though, CC. I have to hold my hands up and acknowledge I know an awful lot less about all this than you - and what you've said has at least got me thinking. A quick google reveals this site, which entirely bears out what you've been saying: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html But also this one, which is more open minded about how much human behaviour has accelerated the process: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/end.html As with everything, I guess there are shades of grey involved in all this. In other words, it's daft to think our behaviour now could do much if anything to change the process, and it's happening for reasons a lot more complex and naturally occurring than most people (including myself, until tonight!) generally assume - but that within this context, humans are still our own worst enemy, and there's more, much more, we could all do to conserve the precious resources that we have. Meaning what our governments are doing is good - but they have to simplify the case, otherwise no-one would go along with it! Fair enough, would you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 That's a pretty fair comparison, yes - kinda like the white man's burden, circa 2008. I can totally understand why China, India et al will tell us to get stuffed - but it's going to look pretty odd if the West suddenly goes all environmental while the East carries on belching its way through fossil fuels nineteenth century Britain style. Aye but those in charge have a cunning plan !! The new 'industry' of buying and selling 'carbon credits' to each other. Ingenious. Doesn't matter if China belches out billions of tonnes of the stuff. They can simply buy some 'emissions' off Greenland and be all square. IMO it is a scam pure and simple. No doubt a lot of good people are involved with the best intentions. If they simply changed the record I wouldn't have a problem. However as long as they insist it is 'global warming' we are fighting I will be a cynic. How about 'Lets fight global rankness, wastefulness and selfishness'. That would be reasonable and I would happily get the t-shirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 How about 'Lets fight global rankness, wastefulness and selfishness'. That would be reasonable and I would happily get the t-shirt. Lots of words. Needs a big T-shirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Good God. I haven't seen that advert - but for heavens sake! I'm reminded of the anti-marijuana ads on US TV in late 2001 - when they had the brass neck to suggest that if you wanted to buy a joint, you were "giving money to Osama"... Fair play to you though, CC. I have to hold my hands up and acknowledge I know an awful lot less about all this than you - and what you've said has at least got me thinking. A quick google reveals this site, which entirely bears out what you've been saying: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html But also this one, which is more open minded about how much human behaviour has accelerated the process: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/end.html As with everything, I guess there are shades of grey involved in all this. In other words, it's daft to think our behaviour now could do much if anything to change the process, and it's happening for reasons a lot more complex and naturally occurring than most people (including myself, until tonight!) generally assume - but that within this context, humans are still our own worst enemy, and there's more, much more, we could all do to conserve the precious resources that we have. Meaning what our governments are doing is good - but they have to simplify the case, otherwise no-one would go along with it! Fair enough, would you say? Totally agree with all that. As you say if 'global warming' is just a nice scare story to get the end result then all is good. I just reckon $$$ is more likely to be the reason behind all this. Who knows. I am far from an expert either but I do know a fair bit. Which is why advertst like the Persil one do my nut in !!! You may have noticed when I know a little about a subject I do get a little excitable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morry Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Limmy says it best here.... words of wisom even if he is a weege! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Significant ? 18,000 years ago (A mere second in terms of the World's history) much of the UK was covered by over a mile of ice. A few hundred thousand years ago the English channel was a marshland with Rhinos roaming free. Do a bit of research and find out what most of the World's eminent scientists were concerned about 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't global warming... It is certainly true that humans have been on this earth but for a mere blink of the eye of history. All the evidence suggests cyclical temperature changes. On the one hand, I can understand why this could lead one to dismissing the impact of humans on any of the ongoing changes. However, on the other, because of the very briefness of man's presence, and more importantly the relatively minute period of industrialisation, I am not convinced by such dismissals. Past cycles are clearly relevant to the debate, but shirley they don't tell the whole story, since the industrial economy was absent from the vast majority of the time over which the changes have been measured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bindy Badgy Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 And for my final rant, how many have watched a launch of a shuttle and been bemused by the clouds of smoke and other s--t exuded from the boosters etc, to get this thing through the ozone layer which at one time the weakening of which was the cause of all our problems. Thanks very much for starting this thread, I was having a real nice day, now I am going to go out with a baseball bat and demolish my neighbours Hummer:mad: Correct me if I wrong but I though that most modern rockets used a combination of hydrogen and oxygen as fuel. I remember a programme with Clarkson on it in which it rained half an hour after launch as the byproduct of the fuel used was water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Limmy says it best here.... words of wisom even if he is a weege! Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Kill every cow.Far better than switching a telly off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Lots of words. Needs a big T-shirt. Woo hoo, I might get one to fit me then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 "What about our grandchildren"?! Sod them - what about the non existent bairns that the women of the world are refusing to give me in order for me to worry about my potential grandbairns?! In my opinion global warming is caused by all the women who've given me the flick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Totally agree with all that. As you say if 'global warming' is just a nice scare story to get the end result then all is good. I just reckon $$$ is more likely to be the reason behind all this. Who knows. I am far from an expert either but I do know a fair bit. Which is why advertst like the Persil one do my nut in !!! You may have noticed when I know a little about a subject I do get a little excitable... That's alright: this is Kickback, after all! Incidentally, re: the carbon credits thing you mentioned above: well, the world is built on scams in a sense. And people will always find ingenious ways with which to make hay out of any new reality, be it economic, environmental or whatever. At least we're at a point now whereby governments and corporations are under pressure to do something, even if they're not entirely honest about the reasons why. One thing I also agree with you about, by the way, is the almost certain likelihood of wars for resources happening in the near future. I went to a pretty interesting talk by George Monbiot a year or two back - and he was so concerned about the age of oil entropy we're heading into. It stands to reason that those with the big batallions, and populations with a lifestyle they've grown accustomed to will be the most aggressive seekers of new resources: we've already seen what that's led to in Iraq, and sadly, that's probably only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. In any case: it always makes me chuckle when people complain about wars for oil and so on - because if oil ever ran out, they wouldn't have a clue how to cope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 if oil ever ran out, they wouldn't have a clue how to cope! Outstanding point. What would we fry our bread in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kannymann1 Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Woo hoo, I might get one to fit me then heh heh!! me tae John: my wife had to force feed a coo for two years to get me a leather jacket!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 One thing I also agree with you about, by the way, is the almost certain likelihood of wars for resources happening in the near future. I went to a pretty interesting talk by George Monbiot a year or two back - and he was so concerned about the age of oil entropy we're heading into. It stands to reason that those with the big batallions, and populations with a lifestyle they've grown accustomed to will be the most aggressive seekers of new resources: we've already seen what that's led to in Iraq, and sadly, that's probably only the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. In any case: it always makes me chuckle when people complain about wars for oil and so on - because if oil ever ran out, they wouldn't have a clue how to cope! "Wars for resources happening in the near future"? They are already happening, and have done for a long, long time. You're spot on about those who complain about it, though. Particularly in America, but also here, I think the general population will always put up with wars on the other side of the world if it means they can live the way they want. As for the resource seekers, setting us and our Western friends aside, that is also already happening. China and India are trying to hover up oil reserves all over the place; the dodgier the politics, the better and they don't even really care about producing it any time soon. Sr. Chavez has now added Russia to the long list of countries he wants to cosy up with; it's only a matter of time before the Russians build there own missile defence system...situated somewhere outside Caracas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 heh heh!! me tae John: my wife had to force feed a coo for two years to get me a leather jacket!! You think thats bad, my jackets made of whale skin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 "Wars for resources happening in the near future"? They are already happening, and have done for a long, long time. You're spot on about those who complain about it, though. Particularly in America, but also here, I think the general population will always put up with wars on the other side of the world if it means they can live the way they want. As for the resource seekers, setting us and our Western friends aside, that is also already happening. China and India are trying to hover up oil reserves all over the place; the dodgier the politics, the better and they don't even really care about producing it any time soon. Sr. Chavez has now added Russia to the long list of countries he wants to cosy up with; it's only a matter of time before the Russians build there own missile defence system...situated somewhere outside Caracas... They couldn't do that, surely? I know Putin seems to have balls of steel, and I'd burst out laughing if it happened - but nah...? And yes, I've noted with great sadness the stance of China, Russia and India on even the very worst regimes. It's awful - but impossible to see what we can do about it. As long as we live in a world of nation states, it's always going to be this way - and in such a world, you have to have global policemen who are essentially above the law, otherwise you descend into League of Nations style chaos. I guess the hope is that the power blocs of two or three decades time - the US, EU, Russia, India, China - balance each other out somehow; but all sorts of tinpot dictators'll be able to carry on getting up to God knows what within their own borders as long as they have the fiat of one of the major global players, it would seem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kannymann1 Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 You think thats bad, my jackets made of whale skin! Ha Ha!! With reference to Moby Dick........I'm no' even going there J !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 They couldn't do that, surely? I know Putin seems to have balls of steel, and I'd burst out laughing if it happened - but nah...? With Chavez, anything is possible. He has already threatened the US with one of the early products of the friendship with Moscow - a nuclear bike... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 With Chavez, anything is possible. He has already threatened the US with one of the early products of the friendship with Moscow - a nuclear bike... LOL! Now why do I immediately think of those Inter fans throwing a burning bike onto the terraces below? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Ha Ha!! With reference to Mobile Dick........I'm no' even going there J !! That's just a nasty rumour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYC-Hearts Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Significant ? 18,000 years ago (A mere second in terms of the World's history) much of the UK was covered by over a mile of ice. A few hundred thousand years ago the English channel was a marshland with Rhinos roaming free. Do a bit of research and find out what most of the World's eminent scientists were concerned about 20 years ago. It certainly wasn't global warming... Do a bit of research? Wow. That's rich when it comes from some one who blithely ignores the corpus of mainstream, empirical research on the topic on which he gleefully pontificates... To be blunt, if you're using as "evidence" previous climate shifts as "evidence" to rebut the empirical evidence of current global warming as caused by human forces, you're indicating that you don't understand the science. Thus, people on this messageboard would be well advised to give no credence to your statements on this topic. Regards-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/opinion/columnists/if-it's-alright-with-you%2c-i'd-quite-like-a-fridge-20070512107/ IF IT'S ALRIGHT WITH YOU, I'D QUITE LIKE A FRIDGE By Yen Xiao, farmer, Jiangsu Province HERE in China, life is hard. I'm sure you've read many newspaper articles about our booming economy and burgeoning middle class, but the vast majority of Chinese still rely on subsistence farming and have no access to modern sanitation, electricity and labour saving devices. ImageWe work in the fields for many hours, regardless of the weather, just to feed our families and keep a roof over our heads. In recent years life has started to get a little easier, but we know how quickly things can change. We are simple peasants and we are forever at the mercy of the shifting political climate. So I have to say I do get a bit bloody ****ed off when I hear that you in the West are all worried about China's economic growth and how it might increase global warming. While you're using electricity to charge your ****ing toothbrush I have to **** in a hole in the ground and then cover it with bamboo leaves. Did you know that? I bet you ****ing didn't. The local Communist Party bloke popped by last week to let us know how things were going in Beijing. Oh, it's all going really well, he says. There's big plans for more roads so that we can transport more of that cheap **** we pump out of our factories that you lot in the West can't seem to get enough of. He says that the banks in Shanghai are doing a roaring trade, what with all the foreign investment pouring into the country and buying up all the good farming land so that they can build even bigger headquarters for the sodding banks. So then I asked him about the plans for the power station and the electricity cables that will eventually feed into our village. There's a few problems with that, he says. Might be a bit of a delay, he says. Western governments are worried about 'carbon emissions', he says - whatever the buggering toss that is. To be honest, I just want a fridge - a little one would do - so that the goat's milk and chicken drumsticks don't go off and give us all the squits. Try having the runs in 90 degree heat when the nearest chemist is 800 miles away. Let me assure you, it's no ****ing picnic. And it's not as if I'm desperate to watch television, although that would be nice - there's only so many times you can hear the same story about the same duck. Electric lighting would be nice too. Last Monday night I got up to go for a wiz, tripped and landed in the wife's grandmother. Unpleasant? Yes it was, thanks for asking. So while I'm landing face-first in the ancestors do please continue to use your electric whisks and your toasted sandwich makers while watching yet another ****ing celebrity talent show that the BBC has ripped off from ITV and vice versa. I'll just sit here in the dark with a cork up my back passage and a dream of a bright new tomorrow. I'm sorry, what's that? You didn't realise it was as bad as that? You understand my predicament and sympathise with my plight? To be honest, I don't really want your sypmpathy or your lectures about the cocking environment but I would quite like A ****ING FRIDGE. If that's alright with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr X Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 You know, I was sceptical about global warming but it's definitely warmer now than it was in January. Hmmmmmm........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spud Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Do a bit of research? Wow. That's rich when it comes from some one who blithely ignores the corpus of mainstream, empirical research on the topic on which he gleefully pontificates... To be blunt, if you're using as "evidence" previous climate shifts as "evidence" to rebut the empirical evidence of current global warming as caused by human forces, you're indicating that you don't understand the science. Thus, people on this messageboard would be well advised to give no credence to your statements on this topic. Regards-- Just like to agree with NYC here and add two points. First of all, there is absolutely no doubt that the Earth?s mean temperature goes through cycles of heating and cooling. No one is arguing with that but to put that forward as some sort of argument against global warming is just admitting that you don?t understand the science. It is the rate of temperature rise that is the problem. Whether the Earth is going through a spell of natural heat flux or not is not the issue. The issue is that man?s interventions are causing the Earth?s temperature to rise at an unnaturally accelerated rate. Secondly, to quote TV adverts as evidence against global warming is ludicrous. Everyone knows that they are trying to sell a product and will use any marketing ploy possible to get you to buy whatever it is they are selling. But their marketing policy has no bearing on scientific evidence. One is a cynical ruse to tap into your guilt, the other is a body of evidence accumulated through data capture from a vast array of scientific disciplines; the two are completely independent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Just like to agree with NYC here and add two points. First of all, there is absolutely no doubt that the Earth?s mean temperature goes through cycles of heating and cooling. No one is arguing with that but to put that forward as some sort of argument against global warming is just admitting that you don?t understand the science. It is the rate of temperature rise that is the problem. Whether the Earth is going through a spell of natural heat flux or not is not the issue. The issue is that man?s interventions are causing the Earth?s temperature to rise at an unnaturally accelerated rate. Secondly, to quote TV adverts as evidence against global warming is ludicrous. Everyone knows that they are trying to sell a product and will use any marketing ploy possible to get you to buy whatever it is they are selling. But their marketing policy has no bearing on scientific evidence. One is a cynical ruse to tap into your guilt, the other is a body of evidence accumulated through data capture from a vast array of scientific disciplines; the two are completely independent Spot on Spud - lazy selfish individuals who do nothing to reduce their own carbon footprint are harming not only those around them, but the prospects for future grandchildren - get blu-ray copies of all the Blue Planet dvd's then they can tell the grandchildren, "This is what the earth looked like when I was a kid", before they shuffle of this mortal coil leaving others to try and fix the mess they left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 It is certainly true that humans have been on this earth but for a mere blink of the eye of history. All the evidence suggests cyclical temperature changes. On the one hand, I can understand why this could lead one to dismissing the impact of humans on any of the ongoing changes. However, on the other, because of the very briefness of man's presence, and more importantly the relatively minute period of industrialisation, I am not convinced by such dismissals. Past cycles are clearly relevant to the debate, but shirley they don't tell the whole story, since the industrial economy was absent from the vast majority of the time over which the changes have been measured? Do a bit of research? Wow. That's rich when it comes from some one who blithely ignores the corpus of mainstream, empirical research on the topic on which he gleefully pontificates... To be blunt, if you're using as "evidence" previous climate shifts as "evidence" to rebut the empirical evidence of current global warming as caused by human forces, you're indicating that you don't understand the science. Thus, people on this messageboard would be well advised to give no credence to your statements on this topic. Regards-- Just like to agree with NYC here and add two points. First of all, there is absolutely no doubt that the Earth’s mean temperature goes through cycles of heating and cooling. No one is arguing with that but to put that forward as some sort of argument against global warming is just admitting that you don’t understand the science. It is the rate of temperature rise that is the problem. Whether the Earth is going through a spell of natural heat flux or not is not the issue. The issue is that man’s interventions are causing the Earth’s temperature to rise at an unnaturally accelerated rate. Secondly, to quote TV adverts as evidence against global warming is ludicrous. Everyone knows that they are trying to sell a product and will use any marketing ploy possible to get you to buy whatever it is they are selling. But their marketing policy has no bearing on scientific evidence. One is a cynical ruse to tap into your guilt, the other is a body of evidence accumulated through data capture from a vast array of scientific disciplines; the two are completely independent I don't think you get my point. I have never said humans don't affect the Environment and the Climate. Of course we do. The point is we affect it a minute amount. We are getting all excited because temperatues go up by 1 degree or there are more storms in one area than another. These things are trivial !! That is why I use previous climate's to show just how trivial these changes really are. The only problem we have with these changes is they have a disproportionate impact because there are too many of us !! We like to live inthe areas that will be impatced by tiny changes in the Worlds climate. Beside the sea. On Rivers. Beside flood plains. In tropical storm zones. The list goes on... The UK in 100,000 years will quite possibly be a trpoical rainforest or covered in 2 miles of ice. That will have about 0.0000001% to do with us. That is all I am trying to point out. I am in total agreement that humans are causing climate change. It means close to **** all however. Comprende Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spud Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I don't think you get my point. I have never said humans don't affect the Environment and the Climate. Of course we do. The point is we affect it a minute amount. We are getting all excited because temperatues go up by 1 degree or there are more storms in one area than another. These things are trivial !! I understand your point but cannot agree with it. Small mean temperature changes, if they occur at a rapid rate are not trivial; the biota has no chance to adapt to the environmental change. I can give you an example from many. Here in South Africa, the karoo is an arid region, which to its west supports the Cape Floristic Region. There are approximately 8000 plant species in the CFR and around 5500 occur no where else. A rise of a couple of degrees will cause the west coast to dry and become a shifting sand biome (Antarctic mean has risen 5 degrees since 1974). This, along with increased winds and settling sands will mean the extinction of most of the CFR flora. The arid karoo will in turn effectively move east. This will eventually impact on the water resources of Pretoria and Johannesburg, in fact the knock-on effects are endless. I realize that this is a simplification and does not factor in human population growth etc but I?m just trying to point out that a temperature change of even one degree isn?t trivial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I don't think you get my point. I have never said humans don't affect the Environment and the Climate. Of course we do. The point is we affect it a minute amount. We are getting all excited because temperatues go up by 1 degree or there are more storms in one area than another. These things are trivial !! That is why I use previous climate's to show just how trivial these changes really are. The only problem we have with these changes is they have a disproportionate impact because there are too many of us !! We like to live inthe areas that will be impatced by tiny changes in the Worlds climate. Beside the sea. On Rivers. Beside flood plains. In tropical storm zones. The list goes on... The UK in 100,000 years will quite possibly be a trpoical rainforest or covered in 2 miles of ice. That will have about 0.0000001% to do with us. That is all I am trying to point out. I am in total agreement that humans are causing climate change. It means close to **** all however. Comprende Your point is a simple one to understand, yes. However, of interest to many, scientists and non-scientists alike, is what effect the actions of the current and previous generations will have on our immediate descendents and their children. Changes in the earth's climate will occur regardless, but I think the current concerns are based upon whether or not the human race is currently accelerating these changes, to the detriment of those that follow over the next century or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Haven't looked through all this thread in detail so may have missed this one however it seems to be inconclusive whether the earth's actually warming. Heard a fairly prominent scientist on the radio a few months ago saying the earth is in fact COOLING. I know it depends on when you take records from , and scientific consensus often shows records beginning from 1860. From that date it's accepted - the earth got warmer however after 1940 there was a sharp cooling down and this repeated in the 70's, when the BBC were running documentaries on the forthcoming ICE AGE. Furthermore, published "records" often ignore the Medieval Warm Period between 800 - 1400 AD; followed by the Little Ice Age thereafter. Are there any JKB scientists who actually know how todays temps. actually compare to the Medieval Warm period or the Ice Age of the 16th century to the 19th, when the Thames froze over. Seems to me, that global warming and subsequent cooling is directly equatable to the activity of the sun - or is that a crackpot theory ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bindy Badgy Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Haven't looked through all this thread in detail so may have missed this one however it seems to be inconclusive whether the earth's actually warming. Heard a fairly prominent scientist on the radio a few months ago saying the earth is in fact COOLING. According to New scientist it cooled for a bit due to us pumping sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere and then started to warm up again. http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11639 After rising rapidly during the first part of the 20th century, global average temperatures did cool by about 0.2?C after 1940 and remained low until 1970, after which they began to climb rapidly again. The mid-century cooling appears to have been largely due to a high concentration of sulphate aerosols in the atmosphere, emitted by industrial activities and volcanic eruptions. Sulphate aerosols have a cooling effect on the climate because they scatter light from the Sun, reflecting its energy back out into space. Seems to me, that global warming and subsequent cooling is directly equatable to the activity of the sun - or is that a crackpot theory ? From the same article http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11650 On timescales that vary from millions of years through to the more familiar 11-year sunspot cycles, variations in the amount of solar energy reaching Earth have a huge influence on our atmosphere and climate. But the Sun is far from being the only player. How do we know? According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason: higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the sun?s heat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 According to New scientist it cooled for a bit due to us pumping sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere and then started to warm up again. http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11639 From the same article http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11650 Stokesy, thanks for posting these links - very informative - I also like the discussions that continue after the articles. I am going to continue my feeble attempt in reducing my carbon footprint, whether it matters a jot, or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I understand your point but cannot agree with it. Small mean temperature changes, if they occur at a rapid rate are not trivial; the biota has no chance to adapt to the environmental change. I can give you an example from many.Here in South Africa, the karoo is an arid region, which to its west supports the Cape Floristic Region. There are approximately 8000 plant species in the CFR and around 5500 occur no where else. A rise of a couple of degrees will cause the west coast to dry and become a shifting sand biome (Antarctic mean has risen 5 degrees since 1974). This, along with increased winds and settling sands will mean the extinction of most of the CFR flora. The arid karoo will in turn effectively move east. This will eventually impact on the water resources of Pretoria and Johannesburg, in fact the knock-on effects are endless. I realize that this is a simplification and does not factor in human population growth etc but I?m just trying to point out that a temperature change of even one degree isn?t trivial. I hear what you are saying and all. I just think if you look at the above the only real impact is to people are probably some animals. This is what happens, that is what is meant to happen. Not nice to think about but the truth nonetheless. If there were only say 1 billion people on this Earth this climate change we are seeing would mean very little. If there were 20 billion people on the World today half of us would probably be dead very soon. There is plenty of safe hospitable land to go around, plenty of fresh food and water and shelter - but only for the right amount of people. I reckon we could be due some serious event for us humans. Who knows what but something that could wipe out half of us. To be fair it is long overdue !! I just hope I am ithe lucky half.. Your point is a simple one to understand, yes. However, of interest to many, scientists and non-scientists alike, is what effect the actions of the current and previous generations will have on our immediate descendents and their children. Changes in the earth's climate will occur regardless, but I think the current concerns are based upon whether or not the human race is currently accelerating these changes, to the detriment of those that follow over the next century or two. I do agree. I also do think that studies into the effect of our actions on the World are important to understand. I just think it is a losing battle whichever way you look at it. There could be an amazing discovery tomorrow that would make carbon emissions zero. Would that solve our problems ? Very unlikely. Only one solution and that is to reduce our numbers. If we don't do it ourselves nature will take over. Always has and always will. Not being a 'doommonger' or anything - just realistic. In fact I just enjoy life and don't worry too much about things - so maybe it is a good way to look at things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I couldn't give a stuff about global warming. Scotland's too cold as it is and the planet's always gone through cycles of warming up and cooling down. That's what evolution's about. All this environment stuff is just an excuse for nationl/local government to hit us with more taxes and be lazy. I'll continue to drive my gas guzzling car that I use every day for my short journey to work. I'll continue to ride my 1000cc motorcycle that I use for leisure purposes only. I couldn't give a toss about how fuel efficient my refrigerator is. I won't switch my plasma display off rather than put it on standby. I'll continue to take long haul flights for business and pleasure. I won't participate in any ridiculous meaningless carbon offset schemes. I won't sort my rubbish into various categories of recyclable stuff - that's what I pay my council tax for. Rant over. Thoughts? I do very much agree that the world has gone PC mad, and there's a lot of tree-hugging nonsense getting thrust down our throats but... ...I do re-cycle; bottles, jars, cans, cardboard, paper, plastics etc. That, I don't mind and see sense with. Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppercrutch Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I do very much agree that the world has gone PC mad, and there's a lot of tree-hugging nonsense getting thrust down our throats but... ...I do re-cycle; bottles, jars, cans, cardboard, paper, plastics etc. That, I don't mind and see sense with. Buffalo Bill . There is one way to hit recycling targets. Get big money involved !! If there were serious tax breaks, incentives etc.. for recycling firms they would be coming to your door to pick the stuff up !! Anyone know details of existing benefits ? Whenever there is money involved people get interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Drago Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 I couldn't give a stuff about global warming. Scotland's too cold as it is and the planet's always gone through cycles of warming up and cooling down. That's what evolution's about. All this environment stuff is just an excuse for nationl/local government to hit us with more taxes and be lazy. I'll continue to drive my gas guzzling car that I use every day for my short journey to work. I'll continue to ride my 1000cc motorcycle that I use for leisure purposes only. I couldn't give a toss about how fuel efficient my refrigerator is. I won't switch my plasma display off rather than put it on standby. I'll continue to take long haul flights for business and pleasure. I won't participate in any ridiculous meaningless carbon offset schemes. I won't sort my rubbish into various categories of recyclable stuff - that's what I pay my council tax for. Rant over. Thoughts? well said. Acting in an evironementally friendly way should be a personal choice imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Good links from New Scientists Stokesy. I'm still not convinced though. The first titled "Climate Myths"- Global Warming is Down to the Sun not Humans:- concedes the sun is the driving force in global temperatures ! Comments at the end also downplay the significance of CO2 - suggesting Water Vapour has a far more significant "blanket" effect on the environment, than greenhouse gases. The second link clainming sulphate aerosols are responsible for the temp. drop from 1940 is even more wooly. Sulphates are emitted from oxidising SO2; largely from industrial activity, which boomed in the western world from the 50's. Can't believe western post-war industrialisation was responsible for the significant drop experienced - but I'm no scientist. Graph below partly answers an earlier query - ie. the world was just as hot in the late 1990's as it was over a thousand years earlier - when the Mayans were about If you track a sunspot graph over the same period, you get simiular patterns therefore temperature variations, I'd wager, are down to solar variations rather than Mayan industrialisation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 My tuppence! My geography teacher(!) gave this theory which at the time I kind of made sense of....(13 yrs ago!) As the polar ice caps reduce/melt, ie the Northern ice continues to 'spew' freshwater, which will disrupt the North Atlantic Drift/Gulf Stream. Now, the NAD/GS is what provides the UK with a temperate climate. If this were to be fecked up there is a possibility for a drop in temps, at least in our 'area'. It's all to do with the albedo of the Earth. Anyway, in a few billion years the 'Sun' will have died and we'll be fecked anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.