Jump to content

Climate change - I was wrong


Sergei Gotsmanov
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have watched the weather get colder and colder during winter and yet the so called experts predict barbecue summers and mild winters. But... I have also noted we have had bizarrely dry spring/ early summers. We have then had very wet summers. Now I am not an expert but something is going on. The experts do not seem to have a clue but I predict a very wet late July August time. When will it finally rain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone with ounce of intelligence would know that that something is going...question have we humans caused it or is it a natural cycle? My money has always been on us causing it.....its hardly rained in 6 weeks.....

 

It is extraordinary but why is it people like me having to work out the trends? I will be right about the rain in late July early summer; I think I predicted the bitterly cold weather on this site last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is extraordinary but why is it people like me having to work out the trends? I will be right about the rain in late July early summer; I think I predicted the bitterly cold weather on this site last year.

 

Maybe the point here is that you're talking about weather, not climate. Climate scientists aren't particularly interested in whether it'll rain in Southampton on any given afternoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Climate change is real. Man influencing climate change is not real.

 

Mods please lock the thread.

 

I agree.

 

The notion of man-made climate change has been invented and exploited by the following interest groups :

 

Governments looking for taxation opportunities.

Research scientists looking for funding

Loony-lefties looking for further ways to control our lives and introduce Socialist / Communist dictatorships by the back door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

 

The notion of man-made climate change has been invented and exploited by the following interest groups :

 

Governments looking for taxation opportunities.

Research scientists looking for funding

Loony-lefties looking for further ways to control our lives and introduce Socialist / Communist dictatorships by the back door.

 

What, like Margaret Thatcher?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how the climate-change deniers have moved from "there is no problem" to "there is a problem but its nothing to do with us" to "there is a problem and it might be something to do with us but its too late to do anything about it".

 

Practically every serious scientist involved in climate change research has reached the same conclusion, that it is being caused at least in part by human activity. The armchair experts can sit on their arses and say its all nonsense, but these are people that actually spend their lives studying it.

 

The point that keeps getting missed is that the climate experts dont need to prove beyond doubt that we are responsible for global warming. All they have to do is demonstrate that there is a possibility, even a one in ten thousand possibility, of it. We arent gambling with money we can afford to lose, we are taking a chance on the future (literally) of the planet and our childrens' environment, if there is to be one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

 

The notion of man-made climate change has been invented and exploited by the following interest groups :

 

Governments looking for taxation opportunities.

Research scientists looking for funding

Loony-lefties looking for further ways to control our lives and introduce Socialist / Communist dictatorships by the back door.

 

shut up dune

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so if it is a man made problem can anyone explain why the Romans grew grapes in the Uk when they were here,or why the Thames froze in the Victorian period ? As far as im aware they weren't zipping around in cars then.

To me it is more scary than a man made problem, as there is a minute chance we could change it back.If it is nature then we are really doomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so if it is a man made problem can anyone explain why the Romans grew grapes in the Uk when they were here,or why the Thames froze in the Victorian period ? As far as im aware they weren't zipping around in cars then.

To me it is more scary than a man made problem, as there is a minute chance we could change it back.If it is nature then we are really doomed.

 

When you talk about "we" are you talking about British people?

 

If so then global warming is a good thing. As you rightly say the climate changes naturally and it does so very rapidly. In between the Roman period and the cold period in the 18th and 19th century we had a cooling and a warm period when most of our cathedrals were built.

 

If the world was cooling then the UK would really be in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so if it is a man made problem can anyone explain why the Romans grew grapes in the Uk when they were here,or why the Thames froze in the Victorian period ?

 

These were localised issues that do not reflect the GLOBAL climate.

 

There is some excellent, and fully referenced, reading on this site: http://www.skepticalscience.com, and specifically http://www.skepticalscience.com/its-not-us.htm, with different levels of explanation depending on your scientific knowledge and understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These were localised issues that do not reflect the GLOBAL climate.

 

How do you know they were localised? I would expect that accurate data was only collected from civilised countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know they were localised? I would expect that accurate data was only collected from civilised countries.

 

OK, I don't personally know that they were localised, however, as my links provided above will confirm, citing local issues such as these rarely, if ever, links to global climate patterns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I don't personally know that they were localised, however, as my links provided above will confirm, citing local issues such as these rarely, if ever, links to global climate patterns.

 

These patterns in the UK weren't freak events, they lasted decades. If they'd been anomolies for a couple of years then you could call them localised, but they weren't which suggests that the changes were part of the natural cycle of climate change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say they were freak events, or comment on how long they lasted. I simple commented on the fact that two specific, local, examples were given, and that local examples do not reflect GLOBAL trends.

 

But to pick up on your point, what evidence do you have to say that just because something lasted decades 'suggests that the changes were part of the natural cycle of climate change'? Some of them will have been natural, I fully accept that. But to then assume that all changes in climate are natural is very poor science.

 

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-basic.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I don't personally know that they were localised, however, as my links provided above will confirm, citing local issues such as these rarely, if ever, links to global climate patterns.
that's the problem for me as it must only be in the last 60 years or less that we can have a look at things world wide.

The rapid flow of news of disasters straight to our tv's makes the problem look worse. 100 years ago there would be news of a flood in the Times and by the time it reached us the news would have moved on. Now with wall to wall news coverage the disasters seem closer and more castroshophic.

Personall y i thin the sun has more to do with things than mans influence, although it must be a factor in the large picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's the problem for me as it must only be in the last 60 years or less that we can have a look at things world wide.

Temperatures have been measured since about 1880, but tree-ring analysis gives temperature information (that correlates with the actual measurements since 1880) since approx 1000AD.

The rapid flow of news of disasters straight to our tv's makes the problem look worse. 100 years ago there would be news of a flood in the Times and by the time it reached us the news would have moved on. Now with wall to wall news coverage the disasters seem closer and more castroshophic.

Absolutely, the media does not help the rational consideration of what is happening and why... it makes things a lot worse because we are prone to a lot more knee-jerk reaction and sensationalism.

Personally i thin the sun has more to do with things than mans influence, although it must be a factor in the large picture.

Solar activity has actually decreased overall since 1960, in direct contrast to land and sea temperature measurements, and this, combined with the knowledge and proliferation of 'greenhouse gases' has led to the conclusion that the sun has been less responsible than man's influence. Of course, new evidence may change that, but there has been a lot of studies into it, all of which conclude the same thus far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Temperatures have been measured since about 1880, but tree-ring analysis gives temperature information (that correlates with the actual measurements since 1880) since approx 1000AD.

 

Absolutely, the media does not help the rational consideration of what is happening and why... it makes things a lot worse because we are prone to a lot more knee-jerk reaction and sensationalism.

 

Solar activity has actually decreased overall since 1960, in direct contrast to land and sea temperature measurements, and this, combined with the knowledge and proliferation of 'greenhouse gases' has led to the conclusion that the sun has been less responsible than man's influence. Of course, new evidence may change that, but there has been a lot of studies into it, all of which conclude the same thus far.

Ok thanks for that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many generations down the line would the impact need to be felt before everyone stopped giving a **** either way...?

 

The greater the impact, the more of a **** I think people will give... hence why so many people believe it is right and proper to address it now, before our kids and their kids bear the brunt. I couldn't do that to my kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The greater the impact, the more of a **** I think people will give... hence why so many people believe it is right and proper to address it now, before our kids and their kids bear the brunt. I couldn't do that to my kids.
for me the problem is that our 30m cars is just a p### in the pond compared to the Chinese and indian cars spouting the muck into the atmosphere. i don't expect them to get back on their bikes after spending decades wanting to get off them
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The greater the impact, the more of a **** I think people will give... hence why so many people believe it is right and proper to address it now, before our kids and their kids bear the brunt. I couldn't do that to my kids.

 

Which is great, but how many people really give a toss about changing their lifestyle to influence what happens to global weather patterns? There is a lot of lip service and good intentions, but very few take it seriously enough to do something about it and from those that i know who are serious are generally doom mongers who think that armageddon is just around the corner (not suggesting you are one of them Minty ;)) which imho is as stupid as denying that man does not have any influence on the earths climate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair point OldNick. However we can't do anything about the Chinese and Indian people directly, we can only do what we can do. And if we lead the way and it is shown to be worthwhile, then other countries often follow suit. Also, many developing Eastern countries model themselves on current Western lifestyles... which is what is causing a lot of the problem in the first place. So by taking the lead and demonstrating that actually, we now recognise we need to change, it is more likely to influence them in the future IMO.

 

As always, there are two options, the easy one (do nothing) or the hard one (do something). Easy choices are rarely the better ones.

 

Or another way of putting it is: Do you want to be part of the problem or part of the solution? Nothing will be 'fixed' overnight... but personally I would rather be part of the solution if I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair point OldNick. However we can't do anything about the Chinese and Indian people directly, we can only do what we can do. And if we lead the way and it is shown to be worthwhile, then other countries often follow suit. Also, many developing Eastern countries model themselves on current Western lifestyles... which is what is causing a lot of the problem in the first place. So by taking the lead and demonstrating that actually, we now recognise we need to change, it is more likely to influence them in the future IMO.

 

As always, there are two options, the easy one (do nothing) or the hard one (do something). Easy choices are rarely the better ones.

 

Or another way of putting it is: Do you want to be part of the problem or part of the solution? Nothing will be 'fixed' overnight... but personally I would rather be part of the solution if I can.

 

 

very well put. Nothing to disagree with there imho. I dont have children so it could be argued that I'm not directly affected, but I would like to think that I hadnt contributed to f*cking up the planet if it was avoidable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is great, but how many people really give a toss about changing their lifestyle to influence what happens to global weather patterns? There is a lot of lip service and good intentions, but very few take it seriously enough to do something about it and from those that i know who are serious are generally doom mongers who think that armageddon is just around the corner (not suggesting you are one of them Minty ;)) which imho is as stupid as denying that man does not have any influence on the earths climate.

 

Completely agree. Despite what I said above, I constantly have my own little battle in my head about 'Why do I bother?' when so many others seemingly don't, but IMO it's all about linking things back to the individual and educating people as to why I think it matters.

 

Global weather patterns interest perhaps less than 0.5% of people on the planet on a day-to-day basis, but the price of food and transport do, availability of water does for large parts of the planet, extreme weather events are starting to affect (and kill) more and more people... the more of these things that do creep into daily life, the more people will, willingly, sit up and take notice.

 

The armageddon thing is also important. Fear is a very real problem. People need to feel like they can do something and that a positive outcome is possible, otherwise they can be more inclined to hide away and do the whole 'La la la, I can't see it so it's not happening' thing. So the focus needs to be more on what we CAN do, than what we CAN'T or won't be able to, should things continue the way they're going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you know what I can't get through my head is that the current generation coming through have have had global warming knocked into their skulls all their lives.

Who is it who leaves the lights on?

Who fills the bath with mainly hot water?

Who can't be faffed to walk but drive?

Who buys from Ikea and the like ,items that have a small life time and will need to be changed quickly using the worlds resources?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all about forming (and breaking) habits. It takes time and effort and willpower to do so and when the examples still being set by previous generations are not positive either, it is often easier for many people to maintain the status quo.

 

There are different stages of change when it comes to things like this, or any other change... you first have to be aware of the issue, then you have to care about the issue. Once you care enough, you may form an intention to make a change, but then comes the hardest part... actually making the change. Even if you make the change, can you maintain the change? If so, great, that's the hard part, and then once you have embedded the change you are then more likely to communicate the change to others.

 

That is a very simplified version and I can't remember who came up with it first, but you can apply it to everything from recycling to stopping smoking... the mental stages we go through can all take time and effort and it is easy to criticise people who we perceive to not be making any effort, when actually they are still learning about something or forming a strong enough opinion to want to make a change. Any criticism of that is likely to put them back, not encourage them forward, which is why I am always very positive when talking about sustainability and other such issues that I believe in... there is no point criticising others for what they don't do, as it will put them off... better to encourage them for what they do do and help move them forward to make further changes.

 

Sorry, I'm wittering on a bit, but you can probably tell it's something I care about. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...