Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Osvaldorama said:
I think it’s very possible for the climate to be changing, but for it not to be a catastrophe. The climate has fluctuated since the dawn of time.
Click to expand...
Really? Did you fail to notice the major heatwave Europe had in the summer? Temperatures reached extraordinary levels. And then you've got flooding which is increasing at alarming levels. Hurricanes are getting stronger as a result of rising ocean temperatures. The list goes on. All these events are either caused or made worse by climate change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StJabbo1
Archers Road said:
It’s already catastrophic in many parts of the world, and for many species. Not maybe, sometime in the future. But right now; we’re living through it. The waters are rising and half the world’s on fire.
Click to expand...

As I said, I think almost all can agree the climate is changing. I don’t doubt that. What I doubt is the theory that Co2 is some sort of control knob that can be pulled to change the climate.

I dispute almost all of the models which predict certain impending doom, as they have been predicting the end of the world constantly since the 1970s. I remember countless news articles saying “UK will be under water by 2000” etc.

But the biggest thing that I really have a problem with is the actual policies and decisions they are making in regards to being “green”. I think targetting fossil fuels in the way they are is extremely damaging. They are rushing into rather extreme changes with no thoughts of the negative consequences to society and the third world
 
Osvaldorama said:
As I said, I think almost all can agree the climate is changing. I don’t doubt that. What I doubt is the theory that Co2 is some sort of control knob that can be pulled to change the climate.

I dispute almost all of the models which predict certain impending doom, as they have been predicting the end of the world constantly since the 1970s. I remember countless news articles saying “UK will be under water by 2000” etc.

But the biggest thing that I really have a problem with is the actual policies and decisions they are making in regards to being “green”. I think targetting fossil fuels in the way they are is extremely damaging. They are rushing into rather extreme changes with no thoughts of the negative consequences to society and the third world
Click to expand...
The predicted global rise in mean temperature of between 2 and 5 degrees by the end of this century has certainly happened before. It’s similar to the rise as we came out of the last Ice Age about 10-12,000 years ago.

The difference is that back then it took nearly 5,000 years to rise those few degrees. We are now talking of a corresponding rise in less than 100 years. To call such a rise anything less than catastrophic really is burying your head in the sand. Just this year we have seen 30 million people in Pakistan made homeless by flooding caused by melting glaciers, alongside record breaking temperatures in Europe, including in Southern England. You probably didn’t notice that though. As others have said, we are seeing the acceleration of species extinction, as well as migration patterns being thrown out of kilter all over the planet.

I respect that you choose to ignore the overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence that this time the change is anthropogenic. The fossil fuel companies are, I’m sure, grateful for your support, although I’m not sure how being in bed with Big Fuel sits with your constant opposition to the evil Big Pharma.

Those of us who care about having a future on this planet for our children and succeeding generations need to know there’s a way out of this. So I am genuinely asking you Os, what do you think we should do? If we don’t cut back on fuels which cause atmospheric CO2 levels to rise, while at the same time cutting down trees, what should we do?
 
  • Like
Reactions: thereisonlyoneno7, ......loading......, StJabbo1 and 4 others
StJabbo1 said:
The post industrial unprecedented pollution is causing catastrophes in some parts of the world already. The climate change is man made not by nature.
Click to expand...

Could be any number of things. For example, Solar activity has massively increased. The temperature could easily be oscillating in line with increased activity from the Sun.

Fossil fuels are an incredible thing. The ability to cheaply store, transport and use energy has given us everything that we hold dear. From an engineering standpoint they are a marvel.

Lets say the argument about man made global warming is 100% confirmed, and I agree with you. I still strongly believe the way that governments are brandishing fossil fuels as evil is deeply harmful not only to the UK but also to the world.

By branding them as evil and setting insane emissions targets, how many millions of people globally will lose access to electricity, water, hospitals etc.

All I am saying is that the push for green energy is fraught with its own dangers and problems, and the current conversation totally overlooks this.
 
Osvaldorama said:
Could be any number of things. For example, Solar activity has massively increased. The temperature could easily be oscillating in line with increased activity from the Sun.

Fossil fuels are an incredible thing. The ability to cheaply store, transport and use energy has given us everything that we hold dear. From an engineering standpoint they are a marvel.

Lets say the argument about man made global warming is 100% confirmed, and I agree with you. I still strongly believe the way that governments are brandishing fossil fuels as evil is deeply harmful not only to the UK but also to the world.

By branding them as evil and setting insane emissions targets, how many millions of people globally will lose access to electricity, water, hospitals etc.

All I am saying is that the push for green energy is fraught with its own dangers and problems, and the current conversation totally overlooks this.
Click to expand...
You really should check before you post bullshit.
"The amount of solar energy Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly. It is therefore extremely unlikely that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century."
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-... of solar energy,net increase since the 1950s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ......loading...... and ChilcoSaint
StJabbo1 said:
You really should check before you post bullshit.
"The amount of solar energy Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase since the 1950s. Over the same period, global temperature has risen markedly. It is therefore extremely unlikely that the Sun has caused the observed global temperature warming trend over the past half-century."
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/#:~:text=The amount of solar energy,net increase since the 1950s.
Click to expand...

NASA will be a government shill or something that we can’t trust…yawn…
 
  • Like
Reactions: ......loading......
Osvaldorama said:
As I said, I think almost all can agree the climate is changing. I don’t doubt that. What I doubt is the theory that Co2 is some sort of control knob that can be pulled to change the climate.

I dispute almost all of the models which predict certain impending doom, as they have been predicting the end of the world constantly since the 1970s. I remember countless news articles saying “UK will be under water by 2000” etc.

But the biggest thing that I really have a problem with is the actual policies and decisions they are making in regards to being “green”. I think targetting fossil fuels in the way they are is extremely damaging. They are rushing into rather extreme changes with no thoughts of the negative consequences to society and the third world
Click to expand...

What do you mean the CO2 theory? It's a greenhouse gas and warms the planet. There are more potent gases like CFCs but the volume of CO2 released us massive. Hence the focus on reducing.

Models are models and are predictions. Done will over or understimate changes but the point is that trends from models and data show the same thing.

Finally I would say governments and policies are too lenient. We have the ability to change but the power of fossil fuel lobbying groups are immense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archers Road and ChilcoSaint
......loading...... said:
What is upsetting for everyone here is that Os clearly isn’t stupid, and yet is willing to go through incredible intellectual gymnastics to justify beliefs that make less sense than the ones he is replacing.
A bit like Christians, really…
Click to expand...

<laugh>. Agree to disagree.

I think the mental gymnastics come from the people that are willing to destroy our electrical grid and energy infrastructure based on the hysterics of Greta and her ilk.
 
Osvaldorama said:
<laugh>. Agree to disagree.

I think the mental gymnastics come from the people that are willing to destroy our electrical grid and energy infrastructure based on the hysterics of Greta and her ilk.
Click to expand...
And who, pray tell, are these people? And I don’t mean fringe activists. Are there any people with real power or a chance at winning it any time soon who plan to do as you claim?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChilcoSaint
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back