Printable View
Thanks Gaz, I think you're doing a great job. To be honest I don't have the time to spend reading the sort of stuff you've been trawling through.
Its obvious that no one participating in this forum is likely to change their views (me included!).
I enjoyed the discussion. I learnt something new. But I'll stick to lurking on this thread from now on.
You're right, I think, it seems the climate's much more likely to change than anyone's mind. Anyway I really engaged in that exercise to test my own prejudices. An ongoing process.Quote:
Originally Posted by rhancock
Gaz.
It is not feeling the two degrees it is what effect those two degrees have on an environment in which we live. I can see over my life how the weather systems have change our weather locally, now that was caused by the two degrees or if not entirely at least they had a huge influence. I also recall when people and cigarette companies said smoking had no effect on our health, the majority of those people kept smoking and are now dead. Do you smoke?Quote:
Originally Posted by Durdge39
Couple of points. Note I've only skimmed your posts, because from what I read it sounds a lot like stuff I've read many times before.
1. Regarding the grandmother comments, I am constantly amazed people can try to apply human timescales to geological events. The fact is we don't deal with timeframes over a year well, and over a century is virtually inconcievable for people. Many of the cycles that influence our enviroment strech over 100's, 1000's and 1000000's of years.
2. I realise the comments are not directed at me personally, but I want to once again make my postion clear. I've read an awful lot of the propaganda on both sides, I've also made a passable study of the data, the raw data, and the analysis. Many of the arguments on both sides are utterly flawed. From the data: is change happening ? yes. IS there are clear direction ? No. Is there very much that's conclusive ? No.
3. So once again the pro GW comes down to "can we afford to take the risk ?" and the anti GW argument comes down to "can we afford the cost of acting?"
4. In an intelligent debate you argue the point not the person. It absolutely does not matter if the argument is put by Professor Bigtrousers of Very Prestigeous University or Joe Bloggs down the road. Unfortunately title impress the ignorant (and there is no one more ignorant than a journalist) and attacking the person is an easy refuge for a failing argument. If the point is valid you MUST address the point. Also just because something is misrepresented by the media doesn't make it the origionators fault. People on both sides have been tarnished with accusations of lies and misleading information when in fact it was misreporting by the barely literate pathological liars that dominate the media.
5. I have no problem with the ongoing rational scientific argument, and that is going on in the background. If they can offer something that compells me to accept radical action is necessary I'll buy in. What I do object to is drowning that debate and investigation in BS. Virtually everything that has been in the media has been BS.
6. As I said I've had an interest in climateology for about 18 years. I'm a mechanical engineer not a climate physicist, nor a meteorologist, nor a paleontologist, but I have read extensively on all those subjects. Thermodynamics was my best subject so perhaps my whole of system view is a result of that bias, but I do know something about energy, light, heat and heat flows. As I said earlier if you do a whole of system analysis the gasses in the atmosphere have a trivial effect on temperature, at least directly, so humans bumping up the content of CO2 or methane won't do anything much in itself. Infact if you do increase CO2 enough to matter the climate change is somewhat outweighed by the inconvenience of suffocating to death virtually every animal on the planet. Now if you argue a secondary effect that increased CO2 will yield a vast increase in water vapour in the atmosphere that is another story, but I am yet to see that demonstrated. Nearly all the secondary evidence both ways is nonsense. Ice sheets, glaciers, short term weather patterns, all rubbish. Also the statistical dances they perform.
6. I'll say it again, I don't advocate pollution, not one little bit.
:2tsup: I agree with you Damian.
Show me some conclusive proof and I will change my position no problem.
Show me lies and discredit/stifle debate, hype up false claims of things cause by GW and I will call it down as BS and question the underlying intention.
Should we all become vegetarians and stop wearing wool?
It would certainly help our emissions, or would it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzler
And still nada.....:rolleyes:
blah blah blah, study this, review that.....still dont have an anwer for the elephant in the room :p
The world is flat, there is NO ozone hole in the atmosphere, god lives in heaven, the north west passage is still iced up, there is an abundance of fish in the oceans. Time is coming to park up you gas guzzling V8, to put away your electrical tools and remember how things used to be.
Then again its all B*##$hit isn't, nothing wrong with the planet, lets just keep going and see what happens, I mean were right arn't we, stuff them other buggers that come after us. So get out your gear men, rip that timber into shape, run the lathe flat stick and turn some steel or wood, stoke up that V8 and lets leave our mark on the planet. It isn't going to matter as Carl Sager said the Earth is drifting towards the Sun and will be consumed by it in a Zillion years time. BAH HUMBUG:(
D D
This is an interesting, if slightly off topic vid.
Firstly I'd like to say that I am impressed with Koala-Man. Very few people bother to read the literature and as a result the vast majority of the people seem to be misinformed. The mass media seem to be the least literate of all.
Koala-Man I have been on the same journey as you. I certainly does take a lot of reading from many sources simply to separate the fact from fiction. Here is a very useful resource for you:
http://www.climatescienceinternation...d=15&Itemid=28
Personally I didn't start off being neutral. I started off believing in AGW (man made global warming). It was only after a huge amount of reading and research that I had to conclude that significant man made global warming by CO2 production is next to impossible. It certainly hasn't happened so far.
If you want to have a rational discussion about it. I'll be happy to do that.
Personally I have moved on a bit and am looking at the vast damage that is likely to occur by what I call the "Flat Earth Society" - i.e. those creating policies to limit CO2 production.
Of all the stuff I've read on this www.climatechangeanddyou.com is the best. Written by someone who doesn't want to be named and who seems to have a phd in chemistry. I made a blog called http://climatechangeandyou.blogspot.com where I quote some of this stuff. I also added David Attenborough on climate change in the video bar.
While many of us are unsure about a cabon tax, and carbon credits, many are negative about it,
Even so, WE ALL need to take personal responsibility and cut our footprint. for free practical info you can go to http://www.megamoneybox.com/cutcarbonimpacts300707.html
Each person should plant 18-20 trees (or large green plants) to absorb "our" carbon impact.
I look at the atmosphere in China and I shudder. in fact, the Chinese are doing some great things to reduce pollution.
The task seems more difficult for them .. especially since it is estimated that there will be 140 million cars in China by 2020
Let's just do something! ..LET'S DO OUR OWN LITTLE BIT.
I've planted over 18 trees on my 1/4 acre block. plus many other plants and ground cover. Green mesh shelters 2/3 down on glass windows, plants shelter other areas, vines grow up trees for extra shade, compost (neighbours grass clippings and food scrap compost) enriches and protects soil, ground cover reduces mowing, water is used off the roof, etc etc.
Big business will gain a lot from the carbon credit system and will be able to trade these.. Big business will find other ways to benefit (research and tax incentives come to mind) , and there's no way to stop the inevitable.
Let's cut our footprint anyway, reduce our use, reuse, recycle, repair, and redesign, and Grow green.
if I die today, I can say 'I did my bit". (If I don't die today, I will continue to do more than my bit).
kind regards, Mega
The post from Mega is yet another example of the mindless dribble on this issue I was talking about. At no point does mega provide a justification for his assertions.
her assertions :doh:Quote:
Originally Posted by GekoMan
Sorry - no offence intended!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashore
The post from GekoMan is yet another example of the mindless dribble on this issue that Howard & his cronies have been spouting for years, the same reason why so little has been done to clean up the mess we're all making of our home, earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by GekoMan