Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 139865 2015-07-13 02:48:00 Can I have a $ each way please? B.M. (505) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
1404566 2015-07-13 22:06:00 As has been pointed out repeatedly individual weather events or even entire seasons in one area of the planet have no bearing on the average global temperatures which are the subject of climate change predictions.
whether climate change is true or not pointing out cold days as evidence against it shows either a complete lack of understanding or deliberate ignorance of it. If you want to dispute it you'd be better served looking into the data on average global temperatures over time than looking at a thermometer. Also the predicted cold period is purely to do with solar activity and an entirely separate thing. I agree the odds of them being right are disputable though with this one.

Well firstly changing Global Warming to Climate Change when Mann and his colleagues calculations were found to be a fraud is a complete copout.

Of course we have Climate Change, always have had and always will.

All this means is that anyone preaching Climate Change must be right regardless of their theories.

Whilst I agree that a single event shouldn’t be interpreted as a trend, the greenies were quick to attribute every single event to Global Warming until they were kicked into touch and had to come up with something completely non-specific like Climate Change.

Then there is the matter of what time frame are we going to use to study the climate?

By simply adjusting the Time Frame you can prove anything you want.

In the end it all becomes a complete nonsense. :groan: 		B.M. (505)
1404567 2015-07-13 22:50:00 I was just pointing out that these events bear no relationship to any debate on climate change. You are well aware of that but you keep pointing them out in relationship to it. Does the Greenies doing it make it ok to return the favour? that sounds like a school yard argument "he did it first"

I'm a bit on the fence myself on the climate change issue, but even so agree with a lot of the things people say we should do because of it. Whether we are warming our planet, cooling it, or having no effect at all and just going along for the ride is irrelevant to me. We should still absolutely make it a priority to not pollute the planet. You don't crap where you sleep.

There are however statistics that are indisputable whatever you are trying to prove, Humans impact on the planet is obvious and all around us for anyone to see. At some point we have to reverse the trend or just accept the extinction of any animal that doesn't serve us in some way.

like the fact we have drastically reduced the worlds forests and continue to do so.
www.earth-policy.org

Like how the % of the worlds animal Biomass (land animals only) that is Humans and their domesticated animals has gone from less than 1% to it's current value (disputed but likely > 90%) in a period of something like 10,000 years - in geographical terms a huge change in a very short time.
www.explainxkcd.com

Whatever is happening to the climate we are screwing up our planet. 		dugimodo (138)
1404568 2015-07-13 22:59:00 The article is frustrating in its lack of content.

If it eventuates, how long will this mini ice age last for? Decades / a few generations / centuries?

It would however knock the current move to renewable energy, as all forms of solar would be of dubious merit if the sun did indeed lose that much intensity.

What would happen worldwide would be an increase in burning fossil fuels for warmth, and an increase in deforestation. Crops would grow very slowly, and many millions would be at risk of starvation (if they didn't freeze first).

Good luck moving foods from producer to consumer if the world is a frozen ball of ice. 		Paul.Cov (425)
1404569 2015-07-14 00:11:00 I'm a bit on the fence myself on the climate change issue, but even so agree with a lot of the things people say we should do because of it . Whether we are warming our planet, cooling it, or having no effect at all and just going along for the ride is irrelevant to me . We should still absolutely make it a priority to not pollute the planet . You don't crap where you sleep .

And there you have nailed it .

You and many others are actually concerned about Pollution but are happy to use the Climate Change nonsense as a means to an end .

Well believe it or not I’m also against pollution and am on record as believing that all Councils should have their Rubbish Dumps/Transfer Stations open during Daylight Hours free of charge so people are encouraged to dispose of their rubbish there where it can be handled professionally .

However, I still believe calling a spade a spade, so Pollution is Pollution not Climate Change .

The other thing I resent is the way Greenies try to twist thinks, like their endless photos of coal powered Power Stations belching tons of carbon into the atmosphere when the massive Chimneys are Cooling Towers and the Smoke, Water Vapour .

Does nothing for their credibility does it?

And a parting thought: How come we have so many eminent Scientists fudging figures on Climate Change and costing us $m’s, when Plants seem to understand perfectly . :confused: 		B.M. (505)
1404570 2015-07-14 06:46:00 And there you have nailed it.

You and many others are actually concerned about Pollution but are happy to use the Climate Change nonsense as a means to an end.

Well believe it or not I’m also against pollution and am on record as believing that all Councils should have their Rubbish Dumps/Transfer Stations open during Daylight Hours free of charge so people are encouraged to dispose of their rubbish there where it can be handled professionally.

However, I still believe calling a spade a spade, so Pollution is Pollution not Climate Change.

The other thing I resent is the way Greenies try to twist thinks, like their endless photos of coal powered Power Stations belching tons of carbon into the atmosphere when the massive Chimneys are Cooling Towers and the Smoke, Water Vapour.

Does nothing for their credibility does it?

And a parting thought: How come we have so many eminent Scientists fudging figures on Climate Change and costing us $m’s, when Plants seem to understand perfectly. :confused:
1 scientist is not 'many eminent scientists'

Who's fudging figures now? 		Nick G (16709)
1404571 2015-07-14 08:23:00 I've yet to see a coal fired power station that doesn't belch smoke and steam, to say otherwise is to be like an ostrich with your head in the sand gary67 (56)
1404572 2015-07-14 08:33:00 1 scientist is not 'many eminent scientists'

Who's fudging figures now?

Comprehension not so good Stalker? :rolleyes:

Where did I say 1 scientist equalled many?

The many eminent scientists I referred to were Mann and his followers or ilk. 		B.M. (505)
1404573 2015-07-14 08:36:00 I've yet to see a coal fired power station that doesn't belch smoke and steam, to say otherwise is to be like an ostrich with your head in the sand

Do you not know the difference between Smoke and Steam? :eek: 		B.M. (505)
1404574 2015-07-14 08:43:00 Do you not know the difference between Smoke and Steam? :eek:

Coal stations produce both. Just because the media use photos of steam, does not mean they do not produce smoke. I believe most 5 year olds could grasp that concept.


Comprehension not so good Stalker? :rolleyes:

Where did I say 1 scientist equalled many?

The many eminent scientists I referred to were Mann and his followers or ilk.

So you've names one scientist, and then used a vague term, without giving any other examples. Also, again, just because one scientist used flawed figures, does not mean all scientists do, and it does not mean that the point he was arguing was not true. Again, it's a simple enough concept grasped by most 5 year olds. 		Nick G (16709)
1404575 2015-07-14 09:25:00 B.M.'s having fun with us again. Several decades of research, data gathering, discussion and just plain old physics, leading to a demonstration of global warming and anticipation of climate change - all rubbish, not to be taken seriously.

A media report about a speculative paper on solar physics suggesting the possibility of a future decline in solar irradiation lasting up to a few decades - break out the champagne, he was right all along!!! 		Jayess64 (8703)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25