Forum menu
Some of them are, and to different places at different time, but the issue isn’t the individual items, it’s the dot>dot picture you’ve drawn from their arrangement. Each of these has been developed for a specific purpose, they haven’t all be made for ONE specific purpose which is what you’re implying.
Name a single, large, government led project that has been developed and kept secret over the timeframes you’re describing in the modern media world? Even within large clandestine organisations subject to limited oversight, so many of them come to light through leaks.
Here’s a good source for counter arguments. Clue, 98% of scientists is a made up misrepresentation:
That’s really not a good source. The thing is that there are no counter arguments. This isn’t a debate or a theoretical scenario. It’s happening right now. You can deny it as much as you like. That doesn’t change anything.
@TJ is it too late to change my mind and join you?
I see another idiot has joined in last day just to post in this thread. And they have even brought Bill Gates into it now 🙂
I suppose we should try and help people with mental illnesses but not something I am very good at.
Isn't it ironic that holiday makers who flew to Greece are on the radio news saying how scared they were.
Which they probably were as big fires are very scary, and loud. Despite the fact that the heat thats caused the fires is from global warming caused by burning carbon fuel, of which air travel, which they used to get to Rhodes, is a contributing factor.
Just read the comments under that Sandy Adams YouTube video. Why do I never learn? How can people think our government are capable of hiding anything. They couldn’t even hide a Christmas party FFS.
Most of you seem to have outsourced your critical thinking to the Bill Gates funded Guardian.
Thats a new one! Somewhat divorced from reality
Thats a new one! Somewhat divorced from reality
Yet within seconds I have disproved you.
Errrmmmm - no you haven't. YO have just shown your ignorance.
the Bill Gates funded Guardian.
Yet within seconds I have disproved you.
a grant that equates to about 0.1% of annual 21/22 revenues of £255.8 million. ol' Bill really has his foot on the throat of guardian editor. My guess he probably doesn't know her name or even care.
@TJ is it too late to change my mind and join you?
Mentally or physically?
My flat is 30m or so above sea level - but the front door only 1m. It might get interesting
a grant that equates to about 0.1% of annual 21/22 revenues of £255.8 million. ol’ Bill really has his foot on the throat of guardian editor. My guess he probably doesn’t know her name or even care.
That is what he wants you to think
Bill gates, central bank digital currency, and BBC agenda all in the same post.
we really need a bingo card for this sort of thing.
Despite the fact that the heat thats caused the fires is from global warming caused by burning carbon fuel, of which air travel, which they used to get to Rhodes, is a contributing factor.
These fires are not caused by climate change. They will be caused by someone being careless rather than spontaneous combustion.
chrismac - but climate change is a major contributing factor in creating the conditions that led to the fires
Whilst climate change isn't the cause, the spark for the fires, it has quite considerably contributed to the available kindling.
can't start a fire, can't start a fire without a spark
I see another idiot has joined in last day
You mean the same idiot with yet another different user name?
you sanctimonious, champagne socialists
Thank you for bringing the left-right angle into the debate, I don't think it had been mentioned up until then. It is of course very important to remember that this is actually a political debate, not a scientific one.
Right-wing politicians, especially in the United States, are determined to maintain the huge wealth created by trashing the planet with little or no regards to the consequences.
Leftie do-gooders have had a profound effect on the tobacco industry by educating the public of the indisputable links between smoking and poor health, to the point where the tobacco market has shrunk so much in the West that to maintain their profit the industry has been forced to concentrate in the parts of the world where people are less educated.
The petroleum industry whose profits are even greater than that of the tobacco industry is determined to fight back against leftie do-gooders who are concerned about the health of the planet.
So yes, wealth, callous exploitation, and politics, is at the very heart of this debate, not so much science.
While the conspiracy theorists are scary in their own way (I mean, having so much faith in government that they can create such a scheme - imagine!), they aren't really the problem. There's only a few of them.
Scarier are the billions of people who accept all the evidence on climate change but then choose not to do anything about it. My in-laws (in the States, which is telling) say they're worried about their granddaughter's future, but drive a Land Rover everywhere, have a dog, are building a new house (and not using solar panels) and even have gas jets burning in lanterns on their gateposts. We're not going to get governments to do anything meaningful until it's too late but if scientists and campaigners win over all those people and make them change their lifestyles it'll help.
@alexroberts so I followed your link to the daily sceptic.
first assertation, it wasn't really 48degC in sardinia because *checks notes* the time&date website said it was only 35degC. then puts an image up of a heat record from the 12-17 jul, despite the record temperatures being recorded around the 24th July and the article being posted on the 25th july. If they had posted the correct image from their source it would have showed highs of 44 degrees for the broad location of 'Sardinia'.
so if that's what counts as 'doing your own research', I'm out...
In answer to the OP, none of us really know, what we do know it's only a decade or so to breaking point. Oh and regarding your sister buying a property in Dubai - she needs a stiff talking to.
Thanks to daffy and munrobiker (others too I forget their names) who have given proper information.
dazh - when do you propose we start killing off our old people? Aged 90 or maybe 80 or even 70? You do realise that many old people do an immense amount of childcare, volunteering and unpaid work.
As others I'm continuing to do as much as I possibly can, trying to gently educate others and look after nature and the natural world around us. Encourage others and let's hope that the very people moaning on the telly about their holiday being ruined in Greece start to realise that they could be 'part of the cause.'
So many people who don't give a toss, but many more that do.
A warm welcome to the forum Alex. Assuming you didn’t just join a bike forum to discuss climate change, what are your thoughts on tubeless tyres?
Bike forum?
this isn't scientific but if you read Gerald Brenan's "South from Granada" and Chris Stewart's "Driving over Lemons" there are passages of text describing the local Alpujarran landscape at that time (1920s vs late 20th Century). Things like farming, terraces, acequias etc. are all mentioned
@Alexroberts, Well said, this place is full of playground bullies waiting for any newcomer to post and then kick the shit out of them. I feel bad for the good people that run this place as this crew really are nasty poisonous individuals. I’m sure many would like to post here and don’t through fear of being set upon. I don’t post here and won’t be replying or arguing with anyone, but am glad someone has spoken up.
@ernielynch the weird thing is that conservatives were actually very on board with climate change mitigation decades back
Thatcher for example was a vocal proponent of climate action three decades ago
At some point, conservatives went from trying to conserve wealth inequality and a safe climate, to caring only for the former
@jam-bo, the daily skeptic also hyperlinked the weather data, so although the screenshot is wrong, the link itself directly disproves their statement
Essentially, they accidently fact checked themselves
I know, and I don't expect a response. they never do respond to actual facts...
Thatcher for example was a vocal proponent of climate action three decades ago
I don't believe that 'phase' lasted long though did it?
AlexRoberts,
I'm open to conspiracy theory, so can you expand on this idea that climate change is being pushed by Gates' funding of the Guardian? Are you saying that the entire climate change debate comes from Gates, and if so, do you have any evidence for this? How do you explain that the oil companies' own documents state that they themselves knew that Co2 emissions caused warming as far back as the late 1970's, and that they actively covered this up? Is this conspiracy too?
Oh we have a new one!
"but am glad someone has spoken up."
You are glad someone has come along with a load of easily disproved false info? OK
The thing about Thatcher was she was not thick and had a science background
Comments where people feel they can't say stuff because they will get shouted down by the bullies are very like the free speech argument. What exactly are they wishing to say but don't want to?
A positive with this forum is that it doesn't take any shit as demonstrated by the reposnses to the deniers who have joined (and presumably left) over the last few days.
A positive with this forum is that it doesn’t take any shit
Tell me about it. You rotten bullies have called me out a zillion times but I am still here 😉
Projections created internally by ExxonMobil starting in the late 1970s on the impact of fossil fuels on climate change were very accurate, even surpassing those of some academic and governmental scientists, according to an analysis published Thursday in Science by a team of Harvard-led researchers. Despite those forecasts, team leaders say, the multinational energy giant continued to sow doubt about the gathering crisis.
So Gates had barely founded MS (1975), from your narrative, can you help me understand how Gates is responsible for creating the climate change 'narrative' as a myth or conspiracy theory?
Well said, this place is full of playground bullies waiting for any newcomer to post and then kick the shit out of them. I feel bad for the good people that run this place as this crew really are nasty poisonous individuals. I’m sure many would like to post here and don’t through fear of being set upon. I don’t post here and won’t be replying or arguing with anyone, but am glad someone has spoken up.
Sorry but tbh this is just bollocks. Calling someone out when they post absolute crap isn’t bullying. It’s highlighting misinformation and tackling what is becoming a very troubling thing in society. Said thing being not listening to scientists and others who actually know what they are talking about. If it’s any consolation I’d be exactly the same face to face.
We’re not the poisonous ones and I will defend anyone with a valid opinion that is backed by actual evidence. I’ve even been persuaded to change my thinking on some subjects as a result of this place. Alex is, quite frankly, full of shit. If that makes me mean I’m comfortable with that. I’ve been called much worse but I’m a (mainly) fully functional adult so meh!
I've no doubt that climate change will be blamed for natural disasters when it is in fact official mismangement such as cuts to public services, a lack of adequate monitoring, land and forestry management, or whatever else may cause or excerabate enivronmental disasters. Likewise, when there profits at stake, such as planting certain crops which increase fire hazard, or coporate capture of public policy which results in building on floodplains, etc., no doubt climate change is an convenient deflection. That said, this does not mean that the planet isn't heating up and that this isn't caused by human activity, so I'd be interested to know more from those who claim that actually climate change isn't happening.
That said, this does not mean that the planet isn’t heating up and that this isn’t caused by human activity, so I’d be interested to know more from those who claim that actually climate change isn’t happening.
Bill Gates and his 5G donkey are brainwashing you and somebody on YouTube claims climate change isn’t real because they once saw a graph and have no grasp of GCSE science.
There is literally nothing to learn from these people. What would you hope to achieve from giving them a platform? At best they are to be pitied.
The thing about Thatcher was she was not thick and had a science background
She carried out research into ways to increase the quantity of air in ice cream so that a multinational company could con children out of their pocket money by selling them ice cream with more air and less ice cream.
She later robbed them of their milk.
And then when they were grown up she threw them on the dole heap.
That woman had a lot to answer for.
Oh I know that. the ice cream one is particularly apt especially as it became mr Whippy!
Its just in response to the Thatcher acknowledging climate change - Anyone with a science background in the cabinet nowadays?
That woman had a lot to answer for.
But to be fair, she did shut down pretty much the entire UK coal industry, so in a way she did her bit to combat climate change 😀
In the last 5 years of Thatcher's premiership UK coal consumption actually increased. The UK simply imported a lot more coal.
In the last 5 years of Thatcher’s premiership UK coal consumption actually increased. The UK simply imported a lot more coal.
I know, I was being sarcastic... UK coal became so inefficient and costly to extract it was cheaper to import it from Africa than it was to dig it up locally.
Where are we at?
I think we're stubbornly walking into a disaster. I think so many people (me included) realise that change is needed, but the personal effort, compromises and costs are high. So many of us are starting from a point of huge freedoms and opportunities, but with huge consumption. The social and financial changes will only be second to the environmental changes.
I think that the environmental changes are going to accelerate. We're going to see not only events (e.g. these heat waves and wild fires) but whole systems starting to fall apart. This will have big impacts on things like food, like energy supply, water supply and more. Things we have taken for granted for generations will cease to work - and that has huge implications economically and socially.
We can argue of climate change is a thing, even if it is naturally or humanly caused, but the next few years and decades will happen whether we are right or wrong. And it's not going to be pretty.
I spent a day this week with some old acquaintance. They're nearly energy independent. Home grow 50% of thier food. Very little travel off Orkney. They live a fairly low resource lifestyle (T5 and horse aside 🤔 ). I'm inspired to look at the options mrs_oab and I have to create something similar.
@alexroberts ok, I'll bite.
Even if climate change isn't created/exacerbated by humans (it is, but let's pretend), wouldn't you prefer a climate without pollution?
Walking down a busy road, it's smelly and loud and sometimes, on hot days, you can see the yellow smog over the city. Wouldn't it be nice if that didn't happen?
Likewise, if you want to go for a swim at the seaside, wouldn't it be nice not to get covered in oil, chemicals or sewage?
How about the unpleasant smells from the landfill? It'd be quite good if we didn't have those, because they stink and could cause other issues for the future, so maybe trying to not make so much rubbish would be a positive thing?
How about that chippy tea? Personally, I like my fish without microscopic strands of plastic, so I think if we could stop lobbing man-made stuff in the ocean, that could help the situation? It doesn't feel like a leap.
You don't have anything to lose by making the world a nicer place. It's basically Pascal's wager.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/What-If-Its-A-Hoax-56a74f4c5f9b58b7d0e8f300.jpg)
Anyone with a science background in the cabinet nowadays?
Therese Coffey has a PhD in Chemistry. Frankly this subject has a lot to answer for.
One of my worries with regard to the doom and fear direction is it does create panic and fear ,bad decisions are made in panic and fear...by the masses..which is not good..and difficult to overturn
I do feel the above has caused a sense of well sod this we screwed anyway, experts have told me so its true,then the, im going to enjoy it while i can more so than ever kicks in, which is understandable
especially if you look at the rich folk having a ball...with the percieved attitude of we can afford to ruin the planet, see trips to newyork shopping for the day from london, when actually they are best placed to save it...or try at least.
Then the rest get told no luxurys no holidays no car etc.etc.
That one holiday might be the only luxury for many, or even their luxury may be , i can afford to treat myself to one beer this month.
I belive this is partly the cause of prices , sod this everyone is putting up prices im having some of that too...
The whole covid craziness also, i have seen very strange behaviour in my area of employment not seen before covid, which i think is also panic, folk are very very stressed and confused more than ever...very understanable again
Now, be aware im stupid and not saying this is fact as im always wary to post opinion on here for obvious reasons.
Therese Coffey has a PhD in Chemistry. Frankly this subject has a lot to answer for.
I am gobsmacked. Her whole attitude is anti science
One of my worries with regard to the doom and fear direction is it does create panic and fear ,bad decisions are made in panic and fear…by the masses..which is not good..and difficult to overturn
I can only speak for myself by my position is pessimistic reality and resignation - not panic and fear.
I genuinely think a lot of people simply can’t cope with the idea or scale of the issues. Therefore they bury their heads in the sand. It won’t dawn on then until it really hits them personally and then it’ll be too late.
UK coal became so inefficient and costly to extract it was cheaper to import it from Africa than it was to dig it up locally
British coal mines, achieve the most economically produced coal in Europe, with a level of productivity of 3,200 tonnes per man year. This is six times more efficient than any other producer in Europe, and places UK COAL at a competitive level with the largest of the world coal producers.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120414095101/http://www.ukcoal.com/coal-in-britain
Some countries such as Poland massively subsidise their coal industry.
https://caneurope.org/commission-gives-go-ahead-to-poland-s-massive-coal-subsidies/
I am gobsmacked. Her whole attitude is anti science
Perhaps it was all someone else's work and she bullied them into doing it for her?
The UK's immediate problem will be if the gulf stream falters / fails... We'll have some proper shit weather to complain about then.
Best guesses for when this happens is anywhere from 2 to 25 years.
Read that in the Guardian - Gulf stream to end some time between 2025 (!!!!) and 2095 - what tyres for Artic tundra wasteland..........
I genuinely think a lot of people simply can’t cope with the idea or scale of the issues.
Along with a total refusal to take any significant steps personally.
Gulf Stream collapse would be a bit shit. From my understanding it’s why we have a nice stable climate compared to other places on a similar latitude. Countries with world renowned mild conditions like Siberia!
Time to start stocking up on snowmobiles, balaclavas and snow shovels for the grand opening of Phill’s winter fun emporium.
Read that in the Guardian
probably an editorial piece by Bill Gates’ 5G pet donkey. Not a trusted source
Helplessness and resignation is where I'm at. I try to make what changes I can, because it seems the right thing to do and like all of us I could probably do more, But I don't think it's actually going to make a blind bit of difference to preventing impending disaster. Too little, too late.
Bill Gates and his 5G donkey are brainwashing you and somebody on YouTube claims climate change isn’t real because they once saw a graph and have no grasp of GCSE science.
There is literally nothing to learn from these people. What would you hope to achieve from giving them a platform? At best they are to be pitied.
Gates may well be a nerferous character and may well be profiting from climate change policy, he sure tends to profit from everything else. His connections to the pandemic and his business conduct in Africa are seriously dubious. I fully understand and share a lot of the cynicism directed his way. None of this means climate change is a hoax, however.
I don't have time for outright deniers because the evidence to me looks substantial and the main way I assess things as a non-scientific observer is by following the money. When you follow the money with climate change denial it leads straight back to the oil companies, murky 'thinktanks', and a lot of other vested interest that make a fortune from the extraction, production, and sale from fossil fuels.
That said, some of the arguments I've heard are interesting. One that makes sense to me is how in the past vast swaths of the planet had no where near the levels of habitation that they do today, so natural disaters and events nowadays have far more scope for destruction and displacement, such as the recent floods in ****stan. Again, this has no impact on the theory that global heating is driven by greenhouse gas emissions, but understanding the nuances of the problem — especially given how this is connected to other issues such as deforestisation, soil loss, loss of diversity — is important to me.
Overall, I strongly agree with 'EhWhoMe' insofar as the proposed 'green' changes to our societies and economies make sense far beyond mitigating global heating, as serious as that may be. I desperately want to smash the car hegemony, I no longer want to be surrounded by idiotic luxury tanks hurtling around urban spaces, don't want to swim in contaminated waters, I hate noise pollution and want to live in relative peace, want access to a clean, natural and healthy enivronment which is as free of pollution as possible, etc, etc.
That said, some of the arguments I’ve heard are interesting. One that makes sense to me is how in the past vast swaths of the planet had no where near the levels of habitation that they do today, so natural disaters and events nowadays have far more scope for destruction and displacement, such as the recent floods in ****stan. Again, this has no impact on the theory that global heating is driven by greenhouse gas emissions, but understanding the nuances of the problem — especially given how this is connected to other issues such as deforestisation, soil loss, loss of diversity — is important to me.
everything described above is part of anthropogenic climate change. Climate change caused by the actions of mankind. It encompasses more than GHG’s, they’re just one major contributory factor.
I commend you for wanting to understated more but, and it’s a big but, you aren’t going to get any worthwhile answers from the types of people that have posted in this thread and been rightly derided for it. They aren’t offering a counter argument, just regurgitating dangerous nonsense.
There are people on this thread who could answer a lot of your questions or point you in the direction of others that can. Qualified professionals who study these things for a living and have verified data to pull from. Not people who will simply post links to spurious websites and random people from town planning meetings.
I wholeheartedly agree that we should be striving for a better future any way. I was going to post the same cartoon as TJ because it sums it up nicely. Why wouldn’t we want a fairer, happier, safer and healthier world. The green agenda is just that. Something we should be aiming for regardless of the reasons why.
Then you get dickheads like the Tory MP claiming a warming climate is totes amazings because more people die of being cold in the UK. An astounding lack of knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. Yet others will nod and agree because they’ll take his nonsense at face value. I’ve said if before on many threads. I’m probably of average intelligence or slightly below. The fact I can grasp this and well educated people can’t is frightening.
Same as blokeuptheroad, im no full on green saint but i do try, limit driving milage as best we can, kind of try to save it up for better use like weekends away rather than commute, drive to shops and such , 12k between us per year,
cycle to work in all weathers trying not to be killed by angry SUV drivers updating facebook with pictures of cups of coffee..
And think, hang on im 52 im restricting myself by not doing some things i enjoy to compensate compared to others i observe, not loads of time left, my line of work everyday reminds me how short life can be.
Do i try and make no difference or just think enjoy your life we are done....
Arghhh...
I was going to post the same cartoon as TJ because it sums it up nicely.
It does, but it's about twenty years old. Which is incredibly depressing when you think about it.
The thing with Conspiracy enthusiasts is that, i don't really care if you want to believe the Earth Is Flat, or whether Birds Aren't Real, what i DO mind is when that crosses a line to where it becomes harmful.
With the Covid deniers this was straightforward - vaccination was clearly beneficial, so to argue against it was clearly wrong. And what's more immediately harmful, so it became important to counter that threat with immediacy, which this place did admirably, sending psuedoscience packing whenever it reared its head.
It's crazy that those same Covid deniers seem to have landed on this particular hill, because it is one on which an actual conspiracy has already died - in a re-run of the tobacco companies withholding lung cancer data, oil companies in particular had their moments of data suppression, and active funding of stooges like 'Lord' Lawson, to downplay what they knew was coming decades ago. It's always of note that our denying brethren claim that 'many' 'distinguished' scientists queer the pitch, but always fail to name them, or list their achievements. This time the contrarians seem to be on the side of the very people they profess to despise - Big Whatever...
And again, the difference is that this is actually harmful. Now it may be that it is too late to affect any real change, lots of things are pretty much 'baked in' at this point - though population growth is currently being driven more by longevity than birth rates - but is that a reason to stop trying?
The only reason i can see to encourage people to continue to consume in the manner to which they have been accustomed, is if you happen to be a supplier of those consumables.
I know, I was being sarcastic… UK coal became so inefficient and costly to extract it was cheaper to import it from Africa than it was to dig it up locally
Importing cheap coal - in a foreign currency, putting you're own workforce on the dole queue and destroying communities as opposes to buying whatever is available with government money - on your own shores ?
It might have been grubby and clearly not what we want now but the inefficient Tory thing is a typical market response made up to justify cheap imports - and dismantle the people with power, and then transfer that power to the city - where they produce nothing.
Along with a total refusal to take any significant steps personally.
That is where the government steps in (or would do if they cared about it).
Take a small example such as people driving to work. During the pandemic we learnt that a lot of jobs could be done just as well from home. That has been completely forgotten by most companies now with most requiring at least 3 days in the office. That is a lot of people now driving, getting bus, getting train to the office 3 days a week.
What could the government do - put into place the policy that was proposed a few years ago where employers have to prove why you need to go into an office otherwise the default position is working at home.
My mileage is now around 10,000 a year whereas during pandemic where only critical travel could take place it was less than 1,000 miles. Limit everyone to critical travel and you solve the problem more effectively than pretending it will all be alright if they buy an electric car. How would that go down with the public?
Guessing they would a) hate the idea and b)actually have a point when they say why should our lives be limited like that when no other countries are
And yet another new joiner to an MTB forum to post only on the Climate Change thread...
It will make us less healthy, far less competitive as a nation, paying more in tax, much more beholden to the Chinese State (some of you would love this by the sounds of it)
And that's where I stopped reading.
And as for the forests, the SNP supported by the Scottish Greens has cut down millions of trees to make way for ‘green’ wind power. You can’t make this stuff up
Actually someone has as its utter nonsense. gross distortion of what is actually happening
I hope we are very careful working from home if you can does become a rule - mental health issues will go through the roof imo.
Mixed some days in some not is a good balance
A lot of folk moved further away from the office working from home now they have further to travel.
Plus it had a big effect on house prices in the out of city locations, which is not great.
Not sure on the answer but it is BALANCE in some form
Have you “done your own research”?
Even a simpleton could point out the utter BS of your cartoon's argument. Net Zero is not without huge cost and huge downsides. And we enter into this based on poorly understood climate science. About time you acknowledged this.
poorly understood climate science
Most of the general public do not understand climate science. This is just like COVID where clear scientific communication is required.
And we enter into this based on poorly understood climate science
I understand it - and the scientific consensus is clear. Yes its complex chaotic systems and thus you cannot predict micro events ( local weather) from globa ltrends ( climate change)
Net Zero is not without huge cost and huge downsides
compared to runaway climate change?
I do wonder what motivates these trolls ( or is it the same person?)
And yet another new joiner to an MTB forum to post only on the Climate Change thread…
Yet another * ing mug who can only see one side of the argument.
How would you know how many "* ing mugs" there are here? You only joined stw yesterday.
I do wonder what motivates these trolls ( or is it the same person?)
There don't write like they are the same person but who knows, they are pretty mixed up so expecting any consistency is a bit much I suppose.
There do seem very keen to tell us how we are all wrong but can't actually demonstrate why though.