What could usefully be done with climate change sceptics

[Verbal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UHN3zHoYA0&feature=player_embedded

 

Personally, this seems a little OTT...but maybe necessary. Good to see Gillian Anderson back to her explosive best though.

[Saint in Paradise]

Can't stand that woman, anyway through out the whole solar system

planets are warming up not just Earth. Man is not responsible for all of

it, some yes but nowhere as much as those with vested interests claim.

[Whitey Grandad]

I can think of plenty of other uses for us.

[Jonnyboy]

Can't stand that woman, anyway through out the whole solar system

planets are warming up not just Earth. Man is not responsible for all of

it, some yes but nowhere as much as those with vested interests claim.[/Q

 

what vested interests...

[Saint-scooby]

Get the Daily Mail to say we are all doomed unless we change our thoughts and ways, then we will all be saved..

[trousers]

There is no such person as a 'climate change sceptic'. Everyone recognises that planetary climates are changing all the time for a myriad of reasons.

 

There is simply a difference of opinion as to whether a tiny spec of a species on a planet we call Earth has any significance in the Universal scheme of things.

 

Human beings have a too high an opinion of their own importance in the Universe in my humble opinion.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

It is healthy to want more information before making up your mind. The trouble with the Global Warming Bullies is that they start naming calling when you look for other reasons.

 

In the early part of the last decade I would agree that here the weather was bizarrely warm but we have had three winters that have got progressively colder.

[Verbal]

There is no such person as a 'climate change sceptic'. Everyone recognises that planetary climates are changing all the time for a myriad of reasons.

 

There is simply a difference of opinion as to whether a tiny spec of a species on a planet we call Earth has any significance in the Universal scheme of things.

 

Human beings have a too high an opinion of their own importance in the Universe in my humble opinion.

 

Oh trousers, where to start?

[buctootim]

It is healthy to want more information before making up your mind. The trouble with the Global Warming Bullies is that they start naming calling when you look for other reasons.

 

In the early part of the last decade I would agree that here the weather was bizarrely warm but we have had three winters that have got progressively colder.

 

The winters may have got colder, but the summers have got even warmer so overall temperatures are still up. 2009 was another warm year even compared against recent years, let alone long term averages.

 

 

Edited 1 October, 2010 by buctootim

[badgerx16]

Buctootim:

Don't you realise the Met Office are leading the Climate Nazi's campaign of misinformation ?

 

Now please follow these links http://www.globalclimatescam.com/ http://www.c3headlines.com/ and discover the climate change truth.

Edited 1 October, 2010 by badgerx16

[Joensuu]

It is healthy to want more information before making up your mind. The trouble with the Global Warming Bullies is that they start naming calling when you look for other reasons.

 

And the award for first name calling on this thread goes to...

[SuperMikey]

What can we honestly do about climate change? This planet is a ticking timebomb anyway, we're not going to be here forever. Yes, we can cut down on carbon emissions to preserve the planet a bit, but ultimately we're doomed anyway. Lets just get on with our lives, shall we?

[buctootim]

What can we honestly do about climate change? This planet is a ticking timebomb anyway, we're not going to be here forever. Yes, we can cut down on carbon emissions to preserve the planet a bit, but ultimately we're doomed anyway. Lets just get on with our lives, shall we?

 

No offence, but thats fantastically pessimistic. People think the world is too big for man to alter. Its not. Were actually pretty damn adept at changing the world. As far as climate change is concerned all we need to do is cut back on fossil fuels use, or capture the carbon from them. Why anyone would wring their hands and say "its all too difficult" is beyond me.

Edited 1 October, 2010 by buctootim

[SuperMikey]

No offence, but thats a fantastically stupid comment. People think the world is too big for man to alter. Its not. Were actually pretty damn adept at changing the world. As far as climate change is concerned all we need to do is cut back on fossil fuels use, or capture the carbon from them. Why anyone would wring their hands and say "its all too difficult" is beyond me.

 

It's a nice idea in theory, but that won't happen. We don't have a universally attainable fuel source at the moment, so the UK could use 0% fossil fuels within the next 10 years, and that would have an effect fo' sho'. However, developing countries don't have the resources to develop alternative energy sources. Could Botswana build a nuclear power station when it can't even feed it's own people? Developing countries like India, Brazil and China are emitting massive amounts of carbon, and they won't be willing to change so easily. And in the next 50 years when other developing countries get to the stage that India, Brazil et al are at at the moment, even more carbon will be emitted. I'm sure that we in the UK could easily just build 20 or 30 nuclear power stations or whatever and run the country from those, thus weaning ourselves from fossil fuels, but we would be in a minority of countries that could afford to do so.

 

Climate Change is not the most pressing concern for the Earth. That would be Overpopulation. We have approx 7,000,000,000 on the planet at the moment, and the maximum that earth can support is just under 10,000,000,000. With birth rates rising everywhere, within a century we could be at the limit. No food, no water, no land, no housing, no energy, no electricity, no jobs... it would literally be hell on earth. THAT is the real concern for now, not climate change imo.

[Whitey Grandad]

If Britain is seeking to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions, then why have we allowed millions of extra people into the country? The government was planning on an extra 2.5 million homes over the next decade which all have to be heated, and an extra 10 million people is at least an extra 17%.

[buctootim]

Climate Change is not the most pressing concern for the Earth. That would be Overpopulation. We have approx 7,000,000,000 on the planet at the moment, and the maximum that earth can support is just under 10,000,000,000. With birth rates rising everywhere, within a century we could be at the limit. No food, no water, no land, no housing, no energy, no electricity, no jobs... it would literally be hell on earth. THAT is the real concern for now, not climate change imo.

 

We don't disagree there. Almost every environmental problem we have is caused in large part by over population. If there were only 1 billion of us we could burn fossils fuels, go fishing and chop down trees to our hearts content. Addressing population growth is a social nightmare - far harder to do than stopping climate change or saving the oceans.

[OldNick]

Nature will find a way of bringing the worlds population down. Anti biotics are near to the end of their worth, a friend worked in the pharmaceutical industry and they are pretty concerned that a virus could really take a massive toll

[Verbal]

And now it's gone!

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/02/1010-richard-curtis-climate-change

 

Shame. Was a work of art (for those who didn't see it.)

[Smirking_Saint]

Really ?? The whole worlds population is turning into spineless, whinging mess.

[Joensuu]

And now it's gone!

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/02/1010-richard-curtis-climate-change

 

Shame. Was a work of art (for those who didn't see it.)

 

Still here:

[Verbal]

Still here:

 

Ah good, thanks. I wouldn't have wanted that piece of tasteless nonsense to have been easily lost.

[1976_Child]

climate change is obvious. the question is 'are we humans changing the climate at a quicker rate than would naturally happen'.

 

The answer is a resounding 'yes'. This is not my opinion, this is scientific FACT.

[Verbal]

climate change is obvious. the question is 'are we humans changing the climate at a quicker rate than would naturally happen'.

 

The answer is a resounding 'yes'. This is not my opinion, this is scientific FACT.

 

True, of course. But have you said that to avoid the red button?

[1976_Child]

True, of course. But have you said that to avoid the red button?

 

no. I actually do believe it! There is one good thing about the idiotic 'deniers brigade'. They are very amusing, tying themselves in knots trying to refute the science. There is one chap who writes in the Telegraph - I forget his name - but he is such an imbecile that I nearly kill myself laughing at him.

[Big John]

Question.

 

If you could turn back the clock, at what point would you have stopped civilisation from 'progressing'?

 

Nuclear power?

Coal?

Oil?

Plastic bags?

Radio?

Television?

Tinternet?

Mobile phones?

Microwave ovens?

Gunpowder?

Dynamite?

PVC?

Nylon?

Refridgerators?

Internal combustion engine?

Steam engines?

Air travel?

Space travel?

Transistors?

Microchips?

 

Obviuosly none of us on here are would give up laptops and mobile phones.

 

I would be very disappointed if DubaiPhil decides (on the back of climate change concerns....) not to fly back for the annual forum match next May.

 

I never ever want to get up in the morning again to light a coal fire, so central heating has to stay.

 

I have not driven a car wiothout a radio since my old A35 so you can't take that away.

 

I actually like microwave curries when I am in a hurry.

 

 

 

If we are all headed for oblivion by our own doing, then surely the difference between hitting it at 100mph and (-10%) hitting it at 90mph is of no consequence whatsoever?

 

No offence, but some people are/have been brainwashed into thinking/believing that 10:10 and any other rehash of this bull really matters. It matters not one jot. And you do not need to have an 'ology to see that what I say is true.

[Verbal]

Question.

 

If you could turn back the clock, at what point would you have stopped civilisation from 'progressing'?

 

Nuclear power?

Coal?

Oil?

Plastic bags?

Radio?

Television?

Tinternet?

Mobile phones?

Microwave ovens?

Gunpowder?

Dynamite?

PVC?

Nylon?

Refridgerators?

Internal combustion engine?

Steam engines?

Air travel?

Space travel?

Transistors?

Microchips?

 

Obviuosly none of us on here are would give up laptops and mobile phones.

 

I would be very disappointed if DubaiPhil decides (on the back of climate change concerns....) not to fly back for the annual forum match next May.

 

I never ever want to get up in the morning again to light a coal fire, so central heating has to stay.

 

I have not driven a car wiothout a radio since my old A35 so you can't take that away.

 

I actually like microwave curries when I am in a hurry.

 

 

 

If we are all headed for oblivion by our own doing, then surely the difference between hitting it at 100mph and (-10%) hitting it at 90mph is of no consequence whatsoever?

 

No offence, but some people are/have been brainwashed into thinking/believing that 10:10 and any other rehash of this bull really matters. It matters not one jot. And you do not need to have an 'ology to see that what I say is true.

 

I have an ology, and what you say is false.

 

Kind of.

 

The debate with the deniers reminds me a lot of the debate in the US in the seventies and eighties over car emissions. When progressive states like California proposed tighter emissions standards, US car companies lines up to block any and every move. In Europe and Japan, by contrast, engine technology was given a substantial push, and emissions were cut without compromising performance. Consequently, American car companies produced ever more uncompetitive gas guzzlers, which found fewer and fewer export markets, and were swept aside by the subsequent and inevitable fad for imports in the US. This all played out in 2008, when virtually every US car manufacturer was all but bankrupt.

 

Oil companies are doing the same thing. Instead of investing more than token amounts into diversifying into green fuels, they pump funds into the climate denial 'science'. What's happening now is that internet entrepreneurs and others, having seen the future, are investing heavily in green. And after all, why wouldn't they? The best of green technologies, if successful, also cut costs. (Ask Wal-Mart why it's gone green. It's economics, stupid, not moral flag waving.)

 

The oil companies will eventually go the same way that the US car companies did - unless they wake up. Maybe what happened to BP will be a wake-up call.

 

So: you wouldn't have to subtract from your list, but add to it, as new cost-cutting, green technologies come along. Some will be entirely new; some will render existing power generation (like coal) greener.

[Big John]

cheers for that Verbal. please don't be offended (sorry, i keep saying that) but however those /\ arguments are formed makes no difference to the fact that we are progressing and no-one is willing to nor able to for that matter stop it, we can't even slow down 'progress' as by it's very nature it is perpetual.

 

One example I can think of that I can get my head around; batteries.

The battery makers are always looking for methods and materials to make household batteries last longer and be cheaper in both manufacturing and over the counter prices. They do not however want us to stop buying batteries, they want a bigger slice of whatever the current market is but they do not want us to use batteries less than we currently consume them.

 

The latest thing with batteries is 'recycling' them to ease the 'harmful impact on the planet' but if there was no way for someone to make a few bucks out of this re-cycling mallarky then we would not be having it thrust down our throats.

 

It may come across as me being cynical, but what i am truying to say is that it is ALL about making wealthy people wealthier imho. And I am talking about WEALTHY wealthy, not the puppet politicians clones and wanna be wealthy businessmen.

[Whitey Grandad]

climate change is obvious. the question is 'are we humans changing the climate at a quicker rate than would naturally happen'.

 

The answer is a resounding 'yes'. This is not my opinion, this is scientific FACT.

The climate has always changed and it always will. That much is obvious. The rest is scientific opinion, nowhere near 'FACT' at the moment. The sun has a far, far greater effect on the climate than you or I ever will.

[Big John]

It sounds very much like that 'we're doomed' fella from Dad's Army.

If I could ask the people who start these bull**** scaremongering one thing, I would ask them 'So how come you; live on a private Island with a garagefull of cars, a private jet, servants - SERVANTS FFS. I bet someone further up the food chain of capitalism will shout out "Don't tell him Pike"

 

We all need to kick back a little bit and accept that our futures currently lie in the arms of these wealthy white men, it's a supremetist system that feeds off of the good people within our societies. And I for one have had enough of this bull**** system. I am never ever going to vote ever again.

 

You may say that that gives me no right to comment on our governent and politics in general, but you are wrong, that in my opinion gives me just as much right to comment as anyone.

 

I'm going to promote the idea of working for 'cash'. Let's keep a bit of money in our own pockets. **** the taxman, he'll get by, may have to cut back on a few backhanders to their 'mates' but they'll just put the price of petrol up. Ironically, then telling us that they have no choice, we neeed to cut back on our so called luxuries. Practice what you preach you bastards.

 

I don't wanna work on Maggie's Farm anymore.

[Whitey Grandad]

I'm going to promote the idea of working for 'cash'. Let's keep a bit of money in our own pockets. **** the taxman, he'll get by, may have to cut back on a few backhanders to their 'mates' but they'll just put the price of petrol up. Ironically, then telling us that they have no choice, we neeed to cut back on our so called luxuries. Practice what you preach you bastards.

 

I don't wanna work on Maggie's Farm anymore.

At last! Someone has seen the light.

[Jonnyboy]

Question.

 

If you could turn back the clock, at what point would you have stopped civilisation from 'progressing'?

 

Nuclear power?

Coal?

Oil?

Plastic bags?

Radio?

Television?

Tinternet?

Mobile phones?

Microwave ovens?

Gunpowder?

Dynamite?

PVC?

Nylon?

Refridgerators?

Internal combustion engine?

Steam engines?

Air travel?

Space travel?

Transistors?

Microchips?

 

Obviuosly none of us on here are would give up laptops and mobile phones.

 

I would be very disappointed if DubaiPhil decides (on the back of climate change concerns....) not to fly back for the annual forum match next May.

 

I never ever want to get up in the morning again to light a coal fire, so central heating has to stay.

 

I have not driven a car wiothout a radio since my old A35 so you can't take that away.

 

I actually like microwave curries when I am in a hurry.

 

 

 

If we are all headed for oblivion by our own doing, then surely the difference between hitting it at 100mph and (-10%) hitting it at 90mph is of no consequence whatsoever?

 

No offence, but some people are/have been brainwashed into thinking/believing that 10:10 and any other rehash of this bull really matters. It matters not one jot. And you do not need to have an 'ology to see that what I say is true.

 

i dont mind not having a car. laptop or mobile so long as no other bastard can. the whole thing needs dictatorship style strong government to ban all this stuff, thing is it doesnt mix with capitalism...

[Big John]

you would give up having hot water come out of your taps. good luck with that my friend. i'll decline if you don't mind.

 

maybe that is where the mods have gone, gone to save the planet.

[Jonnyboy]

you would give up having hot water come out of your taps. good luck with that my friend. i'll decline if you don't mind.

 

maybe that is where the mods have gone, gone to save the planet.

 

my hot water comes from gas thanks

[buctootim]

No-one needs to give up anything. All the technologies to replace fossil fuels already exist. Electricity from renewables, nuclear and hydrogen for transport fuels are all doable now.

[SuperMikey]

No-one needs to give up anything. All the technologies to replace fossil fuels already exist. Electricity from renewables, nuclear and hydrogen for transport fuels are all doable now.

 

True, but none of the aforementioned are efficient enough to support all of our needs. Nuclear is the exception there, but the stations are very expensive and there's no way that 100% of the planet will agree to go nuclear.

[Big John]

define 'renewable energy' to me please someone

[Verbal]

define 'renewable energy' to me please someone

 

Sun, waves, wind, etc. Basically anything that doesn't run out - like fossil fuels or nuclear.

[Big John]

Sun, waves, wind, etc. Basically anything that doesn't run out - like fossil fuels or nuclear.

 

 

You cannnot 'renew' waves and wind etc, the sources that you are referring to are simple energy exchanges.

 

Wherever our energy come from they will make us pay through the nose for it and basically the owners of these companies have us over a barrel.

 

 

And they are in cohorts with the bankers making us their slaves. capitalism does not work, we are living proof of that imho.

[dune]

I'm not a climate change sceptic, I am a believer. But what is utter bollix is tha man has anything to do with it. Have you ever heard of nature?

[Verbal]

You cannnot 'renew' waves and wind etc, the sources that you are referring to are simple energy exchanges.

 

Wherever our energy come from they will make us pay through the nose for it and basically the owners of these companies have us over a barrel.

 

 

And they are in cohorts with the bankers making us their slaves. capitalism does not work, we are living proof of that imho.

 

Nonetheless, 'renewable' is what they're called.

 

A good friend of mine in the Eastern US has solar panels which generate so much energy he sells it back to the electricity company. His total electric bill is less than $400 a year. The panels were paid for by state government grant. So big companies don't always win.

Edited 4 October, 2010 by Verbal

[dune]

As it goes im fully behind nuclear and rnewables because a) our coal reserves are like our gold reserves - that idiot sold our gold so all we've got left for our futer generationd is coal, also we can make money as a nation by becoming the pros in **** like windmills and cutting edge manufacturing and developments is our only hope of competing with chine factories who pay their staff with rice, finally we must get away from oil as we're heading fast to a situation where the likes of the suadis will hold the whip hand over us. We are british and we now have smart, and yeah ruthless, tories running the show, and they come from the bloodstock that built an empire so they'll get it right and we'll get back to being great.

[Smirking_Saint]

The climate has always changed and it always will. That much is obvious. The rest is scientific opinion, nowhere near 'FACT' at the moment. The sun has a far, far greater effect on the climate than you or I ever will.

 

This.

 

I also am a bit sceptical about the whole fossil fuels running out, i mainly base this on the fact that unless the governments were not essentially forcing the major generating companies to develop green fuels then they wouldn't be doing much about it at all, i mean, surely if they KNEW that there main fuels and so main form of income was running out would they not be busting a gut to develop new ideas ?

[Smirking_Saint]

As it goes im fully behind nuclear and rnewables because a) our coal reserves are like our gold reserves - that idiot sold our gold so all we've got left for our futer generationd is coal, also we can make money as a nation by becoming the pros in **** like windmills and cutting edge manufacturing and developments is our only hope of competing with chine factories who pay their staff with rice, finally we must get away from oil as we're heading fast to a situation where the likes of the suadis will hold the whip hand over us. We are british and we now have smart, and yeah ruthless, tories running the show, and they come from the bloodstock that built an empire so they'll get it right and we'll get back to being great.

 

As a nation we don't use a lot of Oil, which is generally a pretty sh*te generating medium as oil fired power plants take a long time to run up and are not very efficient. We still use a lot of coal and gas, and if truth be known still have massive coal deposits, they are just high in sulphur, but if push came to shove we could use it.

 

Nuclear is the way forward but should have started a long long time ago. IMO you are looking at 20-30 years before we have a decent nuclear infrastructure. Wind is another decent method but essentially creates 'dirty' power that needs to be properly rectified before entering the grid or else will cause a high percentage of losses along the power lines. It is also pretty inefficient way to create energy as it only works under a small range of wind speeds. Wind has its place, but is not the answer.

[dune]

As a nation we don't use a lot of Oil, which is generally a pretty sh*te generating medium as oil fired power plants take a long time to run up and are not very efficient. We still use a lot of coal and gas, and if truth be known still have massive coal deposits, they are just high in sulphur, but if push came to shove we could use it.

 

Nuclear is the way forward but should have started a long long time ago. IMO you are looking at 20-30 years before we have a decent nuclear infrastructure. Wind is another decent method but essentially creates 'dirty' power that needs to be properly rectified before entering the grid or else will cause a high percentage of losses along the power lines. It is also pretty inefficient way to create energy as it only works under a small range of wind speeds. Wind has its place, but is not the answer.

 

I don't like wind power because how the **** is it environmentally friendy to put those monstocities (why did i use that word - i never use that word) and correct me if i'm wrong but when i look at a green field or an open see - THAT IS THE ****ING ENVIRONMENT - and bu stick ugly things in it makes it not so pretty to look at. I don't know about anyone else but i think our little island has been dessimated enough to what it should look like and wind farms will only add to it.

[teamsaint]

tHis is quite interesting .

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

 

Much beloved of new world Order believers, but interesting anyway.

[Whitey Grandad]

tHis is quite interesting .

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

 

Much beloved of new world Order believers, but interesting anyway.

 

I saw something about this a few years ago. I seem to remember that there were going to be some test holes bored in Norway but I don't know what happend to the proposal.

[Verbal]

The climate has always changed and it always will. That much is obvious. The rest is scientific opinion, nowhere near 'FACT' at the moment. The sun has a far, far greater effect on the climate than you or I ever will.

 

While that is a fact, in the most obvious way, it does not address the issue. The problem with many deniers is that their arguments are based on the limits of their own imagination. Because they can't imagine that human-influenced climate change is real, it must be untrue. Their lack of education, in other words, trumps current scientific opinion.

[Whitey Grandad]

While that is a fact, in the most obvious way, it does not address the issue. The problem with many deniers is that their arguments are based on the limits of their own imagination. Because they can't imagine that human-influenced climate change is real, it must be untrue. Their lack of education, in other words, trumps current scientific opinion.

I have no lack of education. For me, the problem is that the science has to explain also the changes in the climate going back over the last few thousand years. The little ice age, for example, seems to correlate very well with the Maunder minimum in sunspot cycles so we can infer from this that the solar activity has a very strong effect on our climates. There is also evidence that the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere is a consequence of higher temperatures rather than a cause. Climate science is not exact and much of the early alarmist reporting ignored many factors which we now know to be significant, such as the degree of cloud cover, so I take a sceptical view of the latest prophecies. There are a lot of hidden agendas when it comes to energy use and we have to be careful to stick to the core issue which is, 'how much effect do man-made CO2 emissions have on the climate?' In my view, changes in solar activity far outweigh any savings that you or I might make. The govenment view has been, we don't know what effect we are having so the safest thing to do is to reduce emissions in case they might cause an increase in temperatures. It also suits them to raise taxes on fossil fuels and restrict travel.

 

When I was a young boy the big fear was that another Ice Age was on its way. We are overdue one by several centuries. Now that would be really bad news.

[Robsk II]

The way I see it is that if there's any possibility of truth in all this, then we should reduce emissions anyway. They can't be GOOD, whatever way you look at it, and sooner or later we clearly will need alternative clean and renewable energy. These facts alone suggest we should make efforts to pollute the world less and make things a bit better generally. Hardly hippy rubbish.

[Whitey Grandad]

The way I see it is that if there's any possibility of truth in all this, then we should reduce emissions anyway. They can't be GOOD, whatever way you look at it, and sooner or later we clearly will need alternative clean and renewable energy. These facts alone suggest we should make efforts to pollute the world less and make things a bit better generally. Hardly hippy rubbish.

 

That's a fair argument, but let's be clear about the reasons. The problem is that by restricting technological growth now we may delay the development of clean technologies. We need nuclear fission elctricity generation within the next 50 years or so.