| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 148246 | 2019-09-29 00:07:00 | The same people that support Climate Change. | B.M. (505) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1464111 | 2019-10-03 11:42:00 | [QUOTE=dugimodo;1292472]With the lack of real evidence against climate change it's necessary to resort to attempting to ridicule it to advance your view point. It's childish but seems to be the tactic of choice. Apparently trusting in the overwhelming scientific consensus from people actually qualified in the relevant fields Science is NOT based on consensus, consensus doesn't constitute fact, until there in absolute verifiable proof, the matter is a hypothesis, not fact. At one stage in human evolution the consensus was that the world was flat and also the centre of the universe, around which the sun revolved. Over the history of the earth as a habitable planet, climate has changed quite dramatically by other than man made causes, and so the jury must remain out on whether the climate changes observed over a relatively short period in the earth's history as a habitable planet, are man made, or part of a cycle of periodic changes. There are some very relevant facts, in our politically correct world there is no shortage of funds to carry out research to confirm the consensus on what is the hot topic of the day, but an absolute drought of funding to investigate the contrary. A second and not possibly a minor one, is there is very serious money being made by some of the promoters of the hypothesis of man made climate change. This doesn't in anyway suggest that man should continue polluting the environment, and I would put up the hypothesis that the greatest cause of pollution and degradation of the planet is excessive human reproduction, increases in all the man made harm to the environment it is proportional to the size of the human race which continues to increase exponentially, and the pollution of excessive humanity is a problem that mankind is not prepared to contemplate let alone do anything about the growing problem. Critical shortages of potable water, famine and militant struggles for the Earth's diminishing resources, especially energy, as demand soars will be the major problems our grand children and great grandchildren will have to face, if there isn't a major mankind culling conflict before then. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 1464112 | 2019-10-03 20:59:00 | to be fair , most would agree that cutting down most of the planets trees , and pumping huge amounts of co2 and methane into the air could have some effect the arguement is how much effect that has, how much is natural causes the arguement is is any "warming" just a blip in the data . Part of the natural cycles . the arguement is : is it even going to matter . PREDICTIONS and THEORIES ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC FACTS Lets not forget that accurate thermometers and accurate data recording hasnt been available long enough . That was one of the justifications for scientists '~adjusting~ historic temp data . In human history, there have been warmer periods than what we have know . We know this by looking at what crops were once grown in countries that are now too cold to grow that crop . So yes, it was once warmer . And yes , it was once colder . Climate does change . What stupid phrase . It was colder in july than it is now . Thats a climate change right there It only takes a burp from a large erupting volcano to send us back into "a year without summer" . |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1464113 | 2019-10-03 21:44:00 | Global warming and climate change refer to two different related things and both phrases have been used for a long time. My personal feeling is the use of climate change more often these days stems from both the realisation that it's the more correct term and also the tendency of some to point at local weather patterns and try to use them as evidence against global warming. Global warming does not mean all weather everywhere will always be warmer than before. It just refers to the global average temperature and not the weather at all. The effects on the weather fall into the climate change category. skepticalscience.com Also the dispute is more specifically about the extent of human influenced climate change vs natural climate change but generally it's just referred to as climate change and most understand what's been referenced. I agree that the science is not settled, that predictions are not accurate, that consensus is not the same as fact. That we truly don't know for sure what the climate will do in the future. What I believe though is that there has been enough evidence shown and enough research done to give us good reason to worry and maybe try to minimise our environmental impact (a worthy goal all on it's own in my book). The consensus doesn't prove the theory, but it does show that most of those with the relevant qualifications are convinced enough to agree with it. That's good enough for me to think it's worth attempting to do something. It's not something that we can afford to take a wait and see approach to. If the sky really is falling we won't have time to do anything about it when it arrives at our level. I also take issue with those on both sides who make it seem like people who believe humans are effecting the climate are all suggesting the end of humanity is imminent. I don't believe that. If the worst case scenarios are true it's probable that there will be a lot of hardship and disaster, maybe economical collapse, maybe a lot of lives lost. But nothing suggests our extinction is likely, at least not any time soon. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1464114 | 2019-10-03 22:03:00 | If true , there will be good and bad . Apart from some sea level rise no one really knows what will happen . No one knows what will happen to the gulfstreams and oceanic currents . warm sea around the equator could lead to higher acidity and issues for some sea life that dont move down to cooler areas . It wont be any worse than humans stripping the sea bare for food, as is allready happening . If warming makes some areas unusable for food, that warming will make new areas now warm enough for more crops and farming Sea levels have changed far more in human past than predicted by warming . Humans coped in the past when sea levels raised 60ft (yes 60 ft) Any issues caused by warming will be no worse than what we do to each other on a global scale right now . Most of the recent famines , mass displacements, mass population loss are political issues , caused by people . Any possible Mass extinctions wont be any worse than those we've allready caused . |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1464115 | 2019-10-03 23:15:00 | Global warming and climate change refer to two different related things and both phrases have been used for a long time . My personal feeling is the use of climate change more often these days stems from both the realisation that it's the more correct term and also the tendency of some to point at local weather patterns and try to use them as evidence against global warming . Global warming does not mean all weather everywhere will always be warmer than before . It just refers to the global average temperature and not the weather at all . The effects on the weather fall into the climate change category . . com/climate-change-global-warming . htm" target="_blank">skepticalscience . com Also the dispute is more specifically about the extent of human influenced climate change vs natural climate change but generally it's just referred to as climate change and most understand what's been referenced . I agree that the science is not settled, that predictions are not accurate, that consensus is not the same as fact . That we truly don't know for sure what the climate will do in the future . What I believe though is that there has been enough evidence shown and enough research done to give us good reason to worry and maybe try to minimise our environmental impact (a worthy goal all on it's own in my book) . The consensus doesn't prove the theory, but it does show that most of those with the relevant qualifications are convinced enough to agree with it . That's good enough for me to think it's worth attempting to do something . It's not something that we can afford to take a wait and see approach to . If the sky really is falling we won't have time to do anything about it when it arrives at our level . I also take issue with those on both sides who make it seem like people who believe humans are effecting the climate are all suggesting the end of humanity is imminent . I don't believe that . If the worst case scenarios are true it's probable that there will be a lot of hardship and disaster, maybe economical collapse, maybe a lot of lives lost . But nothing suggests our extinction is likely, at least not any time soon . "It's not something that we can afford to take a wait and see approach to . " Existing civilisation and national economies, depend on production of foods, manufactured goods and energy . By all means let us react immediately and stop or seriously curtail the use of fossil fuels, but just spouting this dogma as if it is the holy grail, is extremely niaive . there would be serious consequences . Our food production depends on fertilisers, chemicals and fossil fuels, and heaven forbid we overlook the adverse effects of cattle farts . Our society relies on fossil fuels for transport, manufacturing and heating, and on electricity, which is generated in most countries using fossil fuels (NZ being one of the exceptions) Any cutbacks in fossil fuel use carry major consequences, economical and societal - it is not something that can be easily accomplished . In April 2019 the World population was estimated at 7 . 7 Billion and is projected to grow by 26% to 9 . 7 Billion by 2050 . The most populous continent will be Africa, and Islam will be the largest and most dominant religion . If you are not alarmed by these figures, then you should be, because the population growth is not coming from advanced countries, their populations are projected to remain static or decrease . The buried statistic is that the population growth explosion comes from people who are least able to educate and care for their progeny, or even adequately feed them . The very peoples who can least contribute to humanity are these third world bulk breeders, they will not be brought up to our developed societies levels, to the contrary they will drag the developed societies down . For those who may have noticed there is a move in the United Nations for Migration to be a "Human Right", which has been opposed by a few enlightened nations such as the USA, Japan and Australia, but not the UK, or the EU . One cannot help but note the "enrichment suffered" by countries such as Sweden by relatively restricted 3rd world immigration . Just think about what it could mean for tolerant welcoming society's such as New Zealand, not that one would expect the World's No 1 virtue signaler Jacinda Adhern to seriously contemplate such consequences . World human population growth is the real elephant in the room, it will increase all types on man made pollution, it will increase the demand for shrinking resources, the demands for all types of fuels and energy, and on the World's capacity for food production . Lack of potable water is a major problem in many areas, and increased human demand will only exacerbate that problem . Over population is a problem that won't go away, it will only grow, and for the long term survival of humanity at sometime will need to be addressed, and is likely to end very tragically, not in my lifetime, but possibly in my children's and definitely in my grandchildren's life times . I would suggest that a bit of climate change is very small beer in comparison . |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 1464116 | 2019-10-04 00:32:00 | @ KenE I totally agree. And if we could fix the population growth issues we might very well fix the climate change issues in the process. People dance around population growth because although the solution might be obvious getting humanity as a whole to agree to it might be impossible and would certainly be very difficult. Probably political suicide to support population control. Growing until we reach crisis point and disaster happens might be the only human population limit that will work. I sure hope not. Religion in general worries me, some more than others though. The fact that population growth is largest in cultures I would rather not live in also concerns me. But I have to hold out some hope that we will strive towards a solution learning from our mistakes as we go. Society today is certainly more pleasant than medieval times and that was relatively recent in the grand scheme of things. Hopefully our descendants will look back at these times and be happy not to live like we did because things have gotten better much like most of us wouldn't want to go back to the days before electricity and flushing toilets. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1464117 | 2019-10-04 01:28:00 | Our food production depends on fertilisers, chemicals and fossil fuels, and heaven forbid we overlook the adverse effects of cattle farts. Stop looking, I’ve solved it. It’s us, the animals were framed. 10031 |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1464118 | 2019-10-04 01:37:00 | We should be building Fortress NZ, supported by a decent Army, Navy and Air Force, together with manufacturing facilities capable of supporting as many essential things as possible and not buying from outside. Can't rely on UK and US anymore to protect us. At the very least it would give the country a sense of direction which it sadly lacks and soak up a lot of unemployed into the services which would do a lot of them a load of good. We should be setting up the country for a long term future even if it is futile, improving infrastructure, electrifying the main trunk line, building up coastal shipping. |
zqwerty (97) | ||
| 1464119 | 2019-10-04 04:15:00 | When you have idiots like the Catholic church saying you can't use contraceptives but must produce as many children as you can how can you expect third world countries to do as they are told? | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1464120 | 2019-10-04 04:57:00 | When you have idiots like the Catholic church saying you can't use contraceptives but must produce as many children as you can how can you expect third world countries to do as they are told? Poof, there goes Gary, more CO2. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||