Climate Change is here and man made

[KS55]

CO2 is key to warming the planet up, along with other gasses such as methane.

Climate Change is an established scientific fact. It is not "BS", it is happening and is as much a scientific fact as the Theory of General Relativity, Theory of Evolution and the like. The vast, overwhelming body of peer-reviewed, scientific evidence tells us that burning fossil fuels for around 200 years is warming the planet up. It's not hysteria, it's not "BS", it's a scientific fact.

The problem we have with Climate Change is that if you are wrong, and the scientists are correct, our children and grandchildren will live in a world that is going to be increasingly hostile. It will be hotter, colder, warmer, wetter, more humid and drier in different areas. It will force millions of people away from coastal areas, create climate refugees and water crises. It will destroy crops, plants and huge numbers of animals that live on this planet. It may even cause wars over natural resources like land and water. Even if the scientists are "half wrong" (climate is an incredibly difficult thing to model) we should not be pumping billions of tonnes of gasses into the atmosphere every year.

We simply cannot gamble that the "non MSN" news - a source of misinformation - is correct. They are not backed by scientific evidence, it's as simple as that.

This planet is the only one in the known universe that supports life. It has taken millions of years to create a vast ecosystem and atmosphere. We have a moral duty to look after what we have been given.

I don't think anyone here is saying climate change is not happening. Where the BS lies is in the purported causes and the proffered solutions.
For example, can you show us the causation chain from increased CO2 to planetary warming? How does CO2 cause this warming? How did the planet warm more spectacularly prior to the industrial revolution.?
As for scientific opinion, large numbers are not necessarily a good guide, especially when
--media like the BBC have a policy of not giving sceptics air time.
--scientific publications describe sceptics as "not helpful" and will not publish their work. (One of our most distinguished climate scientists is shunned now, because he questioned some of the received wisdom).
--grants for research are only available to those who 'get with the programme.'
The debate has become highly politicised, the killer of science. We used to imprison people who said the earth orbited the sun; in some US states it was a criminal offence to teach evolution!
As for MSM, their record at telling the truth is patchy, to say the least.

Why We Disagree About Climate Change - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[stonerblue]

My Point is it’s not remotely in our control to stop anything as far as the Earths Climate is going in the future as it has been in the past and us messing about with our current Living Standards will make no difference whatsoever. We are in the midst of a 10,000 year Climate Cycle -ask a proper Earth Scientist instead of these Media Bullshitters. All this too much CO2 bullshit we are getting is complete bollocks. The current BS propangda conveniently ignores the situation pre 1850. The Climate on our Planet has always changed and always will because that’s the nature of our Universe and we’ve no control over this.

What the Politicians can do tho is exploit Hysteria on this “Climate Emergency” to extol Taxes from the Gullible Millions. Thus the Political Establishment is well on board -but as we all know it took them a while to wake up to this Scam until they realised the endless scope for Taxes. And there it is. Will “Climate Change” ever be Tackled? -of course not. There will always be something for the BBC Cameras to focus on for the 1800 News -about us not tackling Climate Change as if that was even remotely possible.

could you pooint me in the direction of a 'proper earth scientist'?

 

[mancity1]

I don't think anyone here is saying climate change is not happening. Where the BS lies is in the purported causes and the proffered solutions.
For example, can you show us the causation chain from increased CO2 to planetary warming? How does CO2 cause this warming? How did the planet warm more spectacularly prior to the industrial revolution.?
As for scientific opinion, large numbers are not necessarily a good guide, especially when
--media like the BBC have a policy of not giving sceptics air time.
--scientific publications describe sceptics as "not helpful" and will not publish their work. (One of our most distinguished climate scientists is shunned now, because he questioned some of the received wisdom).
--grants for research are only available to those who 'get with the programme.'
The debate has become highly politicised, the killer of science. We used to imprison people who said the earth orbited the sun; in some US states it was a criminal offence to teach evolution!
As for MSM, their record at telling the truth is patchy, to say the least.

Why We Disagree About Climate Change - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Points well made I spoke earlier about an expert at UQ in Australia who was sacked because he challenged the the view that the Great Barrier Reef was well on the path to extinction given 2 bleaching events had occurred since 2000 when the sea warms.

its easy to go with the flow and due to political pressure and reliance on government funding to stick to a narrative.

Bleaching events that cause coral to die only to regenerate once again and often within a relatively short period of time dependent on many factors have occurred over millions of years as have changes in the temperature in the sea.

I remember Al Gore all those years ago saying that their will be no polar ice by 2020 if we don't cut CO2 emissions by 50 per cent or so by the year 2010 and in fact they have in net terms increased significantly.

Modelling into the future is by no means an exact science nor are the outcomes of that modelling.

No one can tell anybody with surety if we stopped man made co2 emissions tomorrow how much the planets temperature will increase over the next 10 years let alone 30 years or 50 years and what impact that will have on the crop production , weather events , natural disasters both in intensity and frequency including earthquakes and mans ability to increase habitation on the planet and prosper.

Again yes decrease pollution and we need to treat the environment with respect as a matter of course but we can do that without limiting our ability to do all the other things we need to do to attempt to make it a better world for all particularly the poor that just in many cases need basic access to health , food and shelter something as human species we have not done well in ensuring occurs today let alone when the climate is supposed to " extinct all of us ".

that will happen when the sun ceases to provide what all plant and animal life require to exist.

 

[BlueHammer85]

unfortunately the woke who own most of the media and misinformation are doomsayers offering no practical solutions to the doom saying they promote and are the last to sacrifice their c02 footprint.

If it wasn't for the ''woke'' media , it wouldn't be in the Media at all

Right wing press would rather not discuss Climate Change

 

[KS55]

If it wasn't for the ''woke'' media , it wouldn't be in the Media at all

Right wing press would rather not discuss Climate Change

Nonsense. Tap my link at #1271, for example. Utube is hardly woke, but it is they who publish/carry Patrick Moore for example. Times and Telegraph both have extensive coverage. You are trying to politicise a scientific debate, a sure sign of shaky ground.

 

[mancity1]

If it wasn't for the ''woke'' media , it wouldn't be in the Media at all

Right wing press would rather not discuss Climate Change

Woke are on both sides of the political spectrum , there will always be misinformation when politics is involved.

there is a tendency to cancel anybody who challenges conventional , popular or money making norms from both " sides of the political spectrum "

in a net zero wealth environment one person's loss is another ones gain.

the pandemic has seen a big swing from the poor and middle class to the rich and elites in a very short period of time.

I believe climate change will be no different if it continues on the course it has taken.

Banks and government and the elite deciding who gets what and how much more so than ever with personal freedoms in some cases being handed out rather than a birth right.

the right are as guilty of misinformation as the left if not more depending on the subject matter.

I know right wing media discuss climate change Murdoch News has done a 16 page spread in the Herald Sun as to why its imperative that Australia for example commits to net zero by 2050.

It gets down to following the money trail.

We have the wealthy challenging the wants and desires of the wealthy in the name of climate change no matter the political persuasion.

Is Prince William right when he says Blue Origin and Spacex etc should put their missions into climate causes on earth when both spout to be good climate citizens for example when both state they believe we must act on climate change without defining what that is and how to keep the earth cooler.

 

[mancity1]

Nonsense. Tap my link at #1271, for example. Utube is hardly woke, but it is they who publish Patrick Moore for example. Times and Telegraph both have extensive coverage. You are trying to politicise a scientific debate, a sure sign of shaky ground.

Refer my detail on Murdoch and the so called right leaning Liberal Government in Australia now committing to net zero by 2050 .

Perhaps both would now be considered by the left as their own (LOL).

 

[The Colonel]

I don't think anyone here is saying climate change is not happening. Where the BS lies is in the purported causes and the proffered solutions.
For example, can you show us the causation chain from increased CO2 to planetary warming? How does CO2 cause this warming? How did the planet warm more spectacularly prior to the industrial revolution.?
As for scientific opinion, large numbers are not necessarily a good guide, especially when
--media like the BBC have a policy of not giving sceptics air time.
--scientific publications describe sceptics as "not helpful" and will not publish their work. (One of our most distinguished climate scientists is shunned now, because he questioned some of the received wisdom).
--grants for research are only available to those who 'get with the programme.'
The debate has become highly politicised, the killer of science. We used to imprison people who said the earth orbited the sun; in some US states it was a criminal offence to teach evolution!
As for MSM, their record at telling the truth is patchy, to say the least.

Why We Disagree About Climate Change - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

BS or misunderstanding. It's the thing (populist politics) for some people to discredit science - most people don't understand it so they'd more readily believe the more simple and palatable sound bites spewed out by the likes of Trump. Yes it's been politicised (mainly from the sceptic point of view as it interferes with economical plans, inherent selfishness and convenience and hence the painfully slow reaction imo). But science is all about theories and consensus with supporting evidence and few theories have been so overwhelmingly backed up with a variety and weight of data as man made climate change. Yes that is necessarily a very strong indication.
Your questions - CO2 - chemically known to absorb and emit infra-red radiation, as with other greenhouse compounds, which is why they have been identified as such. Water does also but it lasts in the atmosphere in a relative blink of an eye compared to other GGs.

There are always short and longer term cooling and warming episodes due to a number of 'natural' factors such as sun spots - which exact period do you refer to when "planet warmed more spectacularly prior to the industrial revolution" and maybe I can help out there? We are predicted to go into a super low sunspot period in the not too distant future so maybe global temperatures will fall but man made influences would still likely increase.
Us scientists do consider natural factors believe it or not when considering conclusions.

Grants - plenty has been poured into the "can you disprove this please" fund. Funnily enough very little credible evidence has been found. It still goes on though - and rightly so.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

The reality hasn’t resonated with most people -the Taxes to Pay for this BS are coming from You -and coming from You forever -as in you will literally Pay Forever for Climate Change -cos we have no realistic control over Climate events at all and never will have

It’s not bull shit.

Emissions aren’t just about climate change, they’re about lung illnesses. Have you seen the state of people’s windows where people live close to busy roads and motorways, just imagine the shit people who live in these houses breathe in all the time; have you seen the figures for lung illnesses in cities?; Manchester is said to have one of the worst, and at times it’s rated as the worst, air quality in the whole of Europe… and it has a lot to do with vehicle emissions (as well as horrendously poor transport networks with a lot of stand-still traffic).

Also, it is scientific fact that humans are changing the climate faster than climate naturally changes. I may be mistaken but I’m sure I’ve read a report that said the Earth had only warmed up quicker than the last 200 years once and that was during the Permian Extinction. It’s not media bullshit (even though the media are often full of shit!), it is actually very widely agreed across the sciences.

And we pay tax anyway, doesn’t matter what for, we pay tax with no choice. So at least if they’re putting more of that money into making the world a cleaner place, then I’m all for it.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

The Right are delusional. Ready to believe in any anti-science proposition, so long as it's personally convenient. And no amount of argument will convince them otherwise.

They'll be on their deathbed due to COVID - and still be anti-vax.

In the USA - no amount of evidence - from Democrats or Republicans - will sway the Right from the belief that the US Presidential election was subject to massive voter fraud on such a scale that such supposed fraud was the sole reason that Biden won the election.

And on topic - their homes will be destroyed by floods or tornadoes or hurricanes or fire - caused by man made climate change - and they'll still be opposed to action to combat warmer global temperatures for a variety of nonsense reasons.