UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
News and current affairs => A look at the news stories currently making the headlines. => Topic started by: Miss Taken Identity on September 23, 2019, 07:36:51 PM
-
The word mental within the word enviromentalist is quite an appropriate use to describe some of the zealots after the recent 'global warming' marches by children.
The mental health of many young people in our country is indeed on the increase and it should cause alarm. but not for some. They cash in on young peoples anxieties use and abuse them by armig them with stories about the end of the world catastrophy just a few years away.
The Truth is this is not going to happen!
The dodgy science behind the scare mongering is staggering, and wholy inadequate. However, if you dare to challenge these 'facts' you are shut down like a war criminal called a 'denier' the truth is they are in denial and they do not have the stomach for debate because their argument does not hold up to scrutiny. it is now an 'industry' all on its very own.
The nausiating new born (another one born in bethlehem?) to this zealot religion would be a child god called Greta thunberg. She has a world platform to shout off about losing her childhood- (dear it was stolen from you by those who scare you with cr@p).
A world stage? did she give us any indiction how this came about and how to stop the climate from changing as it has done since time began Duh- and was she able to provide her own scientific research over many years and present it as an expert in many fields of study regarding climate/enviromental/and geology etc.
No just a screaching, self centered, self proclaimed know it all teenager aka new media darling.
Some thought it rude that some world leaders didn't attend to hear her -aw shucks.
I would claim to be enviromentally friendly- recycling for many years-I am very concience of the damage to our oceans regarding dunping ribbish and I confess to being really annoyed about plastic bags being used and chucked and the illegal dumping of waste. I care about my community. But the global warming ticket is just that! It is no secret that vegan warriers are also influencing childrens eating habits with an increase in eting disorders. The green party and friends of the earth are community activists with an agenda of which we know little about.
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/greta-thunberg-united-nations-climate-change-speech-today-world-leaders-a9117031.html
-
“The mental health of many young people in this country is on the increase”. Erm...
This OP is so full of meaningless drivel it’s hard to know where to start.
-
Let's hear from someone who can string a meaningful sentence together:
Greta Thunberg
2 February ·
Recently I’ve seen many rumors circulating about me and enormous amounts of hate. This is no surprise to me. I know that since most people are not aware of the full meaning of the climate crisis (which is understandable since it has never been treated as a crisis) a school strike for the climate would seem very strange to people in general.
So let me make some things clear about my school strike.
In may 2018 I was one of the winners in a writing competition about the environment held by Svenska Dagbladet, a Swedish newspaper. I got my article published and some people contacted me, among others was Bo Thorén from Fossil Free Dalsland. He had some kind of group with people, especially youth, who wanted to do something about the climate crisis.
I had a few phone meetings with other activists. The purpose was to come up with ideas of new projects that would bring attention to the climate crisis. Bo had a few ideas of things we could do. Everything from marches to a loose idea of some kind of a school strike (that school children would do something on the schoolyards or in the classrooms). That idea was inspired by the Parkland Students, who had refused to go to school after the school shootings.
I liked the idea of a school strike. So I developed that idea and tried to get the other young people to join me, but no one was really interested. They thought that a Swedish version of the Zero Hour march was going to have a bigger impact. So I went on planning the school strike all by myself and after that I didn’t participate in any more meetings.
When I told my parents about my plans they weren’t very fond of it. They did not support the idea of school striking and they said that if I were to do this I would have to do it completely by myself and with no support from them.
On the 20 of august I sat down outside the Swedish Parliament. I handed out fliers with a long list of facts about the climate crisis and explanations on why I was striking. The first thing I did was to post on Twitter and Instagram what I was doing and it soon went viral. Then journalists and newspapers started to come. A Swedish entrepreneur and business man active in the climate movement, Ingmar Rentzhog, was among the first to arrive. He spoke with me and took pictures that he posted on Facebook. That was the first time I had ever met or spoken with him. I had not communicated or encountered with him ever before.
Many people love to spread rumors saying that I have people ”behind me” or that I’m being ”paid” or ”used” to do what I’m doing. But there is no one ”behind” me except for myself. My parents were as far from climate activists as possible before I made them aware of the situation.
I am not part of any organization. I sometimes support and cooperate with several NGOs that work with the climate and environment. But I am absolutely independent and I only represent myself. And I do what I do completely for free, I have not received any money or any promise of future payments in any form at all. And nor has anyone linked to me or my family done so.
And of course it will stay this way. I have not met one single climate activist who is fighting for the climate for money. That idea is completely absurd.
Furthermore I only travel with permission from my school and my parents pay for tickets and accommodations.
My family has written a book together about our family and how me and my sister Beata have influenced my parents way of thinking and seeing the world, especially when it comes to the climate. And about our diagnoses.
That book was due to be released in May. But since there was a major disagreement with the book company, we ended up changing to a new publisher and so the book was released in august instead.
Before the book was released my parents made it clear that their possible profits from the book ”Scener ur hjärtat” will be going to 8 different charities working with environment, children with diagnoses and animal rights.
And yes, I write my own speeches. But since I know that what I say is going to reach many, many people I often ask for input. I also have a few scientists that I frequently ask for help on how to express certain complicated matters. I want everything to be absolutely correct so that I don’t spread incorrect facts, or things that can be misunderstood.
Some people mock me for my diagnosis. But Asperger is not a disease, it’s a gift. People also say that since I have Asperger I couldn’t possibly have put myself in this position. But that’s exactly why I did this. Because if I would have been ”normal” and social I would have organized myself in an organisation, or started an organisation by myself. But since I am not that good at socializing I did this instead. I was so frustrated that nothing was being done about the climate crisis and I felt like I had to do something, anything. And sometimes NOT doing things - like just sitting down outside the parliament - speaks much louder than doing things. Just like a whisper sometimes is louder than shouting.
Also there is one complaint that I ”sound and write like an adult”. And to that I can only say; don’t you think that a 16-year old can speak for herself? There’s also some people who say that I oversimplify things. For example when I say that "the climate crisis is a black and white issue”, ”we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases” and ”I want you to panic”. But that I only say because it’s true. Yes, the climate crisis is the most complex issue that we have ever faced and it’s going to take everything from our part to ”stop it”. But the solution is black and white; we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Because either we limit the warming to 1,5 degrees C over pre industrial levels, or we don’t. Either we reach a tipping point where we start a chain reaction with events way beyond human control, or we don’t. Either we go on as a civilization, or we don’t. There are no gray areas when it comes to survival.
And when I say that I want you to panic I mean that we need to treat the crisis as a crisis. When your house is on fire you don’t sit down and talk about how nice you can rebuild it once you put out the fire. If your house is on fire you run outside and make sure that everyone is out while you call the fire department. That requires some level of panic.
There is one other argument that I can’t do anything about. And that is the fact that I’m ”just a child and we shouldn’t be listening to children.” But that is easily fixed - just start to listen to the rock solid science instead. Because if everyone listened to the scientists and the facts that I constantly refer to - then no one would have to listen to me or any of the other hundreds of thousands of school children on strike for the climate across the world. Then we could all go back to school.
I am just a messenger, and yet I get all this hate. I am not saying anything new, I am just saying what scientists have repeatedly said for decades. And I agree with you, I’m too young to do this. We children shouldn’t have to do this. But since almost no one is doing anything, and our very future is at risk, we feel like we have to continue.
And if you have any other concern or doubt about me, then you can listen to my TED talk ( https://www.ted.com/…/greta_thunberg_the_disarming_…/up-next ), in which I talk about how my interest for the climate and environment began.
And thank you everyone for you kind support! It brings me hope.
/Greta
Ps I was briefly a youth advisor for the board of the non profit foundation “We don’t have time”. It turns out they used my name as part of another branch of their organisation that is a start up business. They have admitted clearly that they did so without the knowledge of me or my family. I no longer have any connection to “We don’t have time”. Nor has anyone in my family. They have deeply apologised and I have accepted their apology.
-
IMO Overpopulation is a major factor that is often overlooked in the rise of Co2 emissions.
If the climate striking children were all shot on sight, that would go some way to solving the problem.
-
IMO Overpopulation is a major factor that is often overlooked in the rise of Co2 emissions.
If the climate striking children were all shot on sight, that would go some way to solving the problem.
Or you could shoot yourself and that would be a good start.
-
Or you could shoot yourself and that would be a good start.
I do all my recycling, don't have any kids & I drive a Toyota Prius. I'm doing my bit for the planet.
But seriously, no one wants to mention overpopulation as the main contributing factor in climate change.
A mass extinction event, either through war, gas chambers or by a huge meteor impacting the earth, should be celebrated.
-
Overpopulation, Doug Stanhope.
Try Sodomy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgyumGSF9-4
-
I do all my recycling, don't have any kids & I drive a Toyota Prius. I'm doing my bit for the planet.
But seriously, no one wants to mention overpopulation as the main contributing factor in climate change.
A mass extinction event, either through war, gas chambers or by a huge meteor impacting the earth, should be celebrated.
What a contradictory position. If you positively welcome mass extinction then why the hell are you recycling and driving a Prius? Switch to a 1950’s Cadillac and burn all your plastic rubbish in the back garden asap.
-
was she able to provide her own scientific research over many years and present it as an expert in many fields of study regarding climate/enviromental/and geology etc.
No just a screaching, self centered, self proclaimed know it all teenager aka new media darling.
Are you able to provide your own scientific research? Otherwise you sound like "a screaching, self centered, self proclaimed know it all".
I don't claim to be an expert in these things but from everything I have ever read the proof that climate change is dramatically increased by our ways of life is undeniable.
Here's some reading for you to do if you fancy educating yourself:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
As for Greta, well it seems amazing to me that so many people can be so horrible about a child who, let's face it, has achieved more of significance in her 16 years than most of us will ever do. And just through the strength of her convictions. History is going to write of Greta as a heroic figure, and rightly so. One day people are going to look back and see that 97% of scientists agreed that action was needed but the action was constantly impeded by idiots who think they knew better. Greta is on the right side of history.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g
-
Are you able to provide your own scientific research? Otherwise you sound like "a screaching, self centered, self proclaimed know it all".
I don't claim to be an expert in these things but from everything I have ever read the proof that climate change is dramatically increased by our ways of life is undeniable.
Here's some reading for you to do if you fancy educating yourself:
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
As for Greta, well it seems amazing to me that so many people can be so horrible about a child who, let's face it, has achieved more of significance in her 16 years than most of us will ever do. And just through the strength of her convictions. History is going to write of Greta as a heroic figure, and rightly so. One day people are going to look back and see that 97% of scientists agreed that action was needed but the action was constantly impeded by idiots who think they knew better. Greta is on the right side of history.
I think I know a wee bit more about the world and the climate science than Greta. I do not need to prsent my science I am not the one shoutong and foaming at the mouth about something I have no control over. the money spinner!
So good on you for loving the great Greta, however apart from her bellowing her anxiety, placed upon her by fear mongers and policital activists, and bitching at 'world leaders' did she offer a solution? or present her science? NO!
Why? well because she doesn't have any... SHE is just a mouth peice with empty emotional words. The hysteria surrounding this 'crisis' she claims is staggering .
Where as the real scientist know a wee bit more:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbGZo8D5gnI
Oh And...
Agriculture yields are up- https://ourworldindata.org/yields-and-land-use-in-agriculture#yields-since-1960.
Poverty has decreased- https://ourworldindata.org/a-history-of-global-living-conditions-in-5-charts.
Life expectancy has increased- https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy.
Deaths from weather related disasters have declined- https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/natural-disaster-death-rates?time=1900..2018.
oh and the planet and deserts are greening from the increase in CO2-
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/
Go on Greta tell BAZ a real fan of yours, like it is...
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g
Oh dear! off script not so good eh? The bluff has been called!
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g
What is your point?
-
Oh dear! off script not so good eh? The bluff has been called!
Taking the piss out of a 16 year old girl with Aspergers because she was momentarily overwhelmed in a press conference? Not an attractive quality IMO.
-
I think I know a wee bit more about the world and the climate science than Greta. I do not need to prsent my science I am not the one shoutong and foaming at the mouth about something I have no control over. the money spinner!
So good on you for loving the great Greta, however apart from her bellowing her anxiety, placed upon her by fear mongers and policital activists, and bitching at 'world leaders' did she offer a solution? or present her science? NO!
Why? well because she doesn't have any... SHE is just a mouth peice with empty emotional words. The hysteria surrounding this 'crisis' she claims is staggering .
Where as the real scientist know a wee bit more:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbGZo8D5gnI
Oh And...
Agriculture yields are up- https://ourworldindata.org/yields-and-land-use-in-agriculture#yields-since-1960.
Poverty has decreased- https://ourworldindata.org/a-history-of-global-living-conditions-in-5-charts.
Life expectancy has increased- https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy.
Deaths from weather related disasters have declined- https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/natural-disaster-death-rates?time=1900..2018.
oh and the planet and deserts are greening from the increase in CO2-
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth/
Go on Greta tell BAZ a real fan of yours, like it is...
From one of the websites you quoted, you seem to have missed this graph
https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters
-
Taking the piss out of a 16 year old girl with Aspergers because she was momentarily overwhelmed in a press conference? Not an attractive quality IMO.
If she didn't want to have the piss taken out of her then she should have stayed at home playing with dolls instead of thrusting herself into the media spotlight & opening herself up to public opinion both good & bad.
-
If she didn't want to have the piss taken out of her then she should have stayed at home playing with dolls instead of thrusting herself into the media spotlight & opening herself up to public opinion both good & bad.
Indeed Spammers.
If Greta has disabilities should her parents not allay her fears and protect her- instead of thrusting her into a world where it must be staggeringly scary anyway. To create a scenario where she is uncomfortable was cringeworthy, those adults by her side were pathetic and uncouth- staying silent and letting this poor child with mental health issues get hammered by simple questions.
-
If she didn't want to have the piss taken out of her then she should have stayed at home playing with dolls instead of thrusting herself into the media spotlight & opening herself up to public opinion both good & bad.
She didn’t mention whether or not she minded having the piss taken out of her. Whether or not she minds doesn’t alter the fact that doing so reflects rather more badly on the piss taker than the piss takee. IMO.
-
I think it reflects rather badly on the gutless wonder parents and those who sat and let it happen- and did nothing!
They unashamedly used that child with disabilities to grope at the masses with the emotional propaganda they spew. At one point in that video she looks at those surrounding her at the table for assistance - to no avail!
They were not expecting that from the press. They led her and placed her on display like a new puppy at Xmas everyone to say awwwww.
-
I think it reflects rather badly on the gutless wonder parents and those who sat and let it happen- and did nothing!
They unashamedly used that child with disabilities to grope at the masses with the emotional propaganda they spew. At one point in that video she looks at those surrounding her at the table for assistance - to no avail!
They were not expecting that from the press. They led her and placed her on display like a new puppy at Xmas everyone to say awwwww.
You have got it COMPLETELY wrong. Greta is her own person, not led or manipulated by her parents who were not present at the table at that press conference. Let’s watch the whole conference, not just a little excerpt before rushing to judge.
-
She didn’t mention whether or not she minded having the piss taken out of her. Whether or not she minds doesn’t alter the fact that doing so reflects rather more badly on the piss taker than the piss takee. IMO.
I couldn't agree more. What has to have happened in your life to make you the sort of person who bad mouths a teenager who through the strength of her convictions has inspired millions of people into action for the good of everyone... including those pathetic adults insulting her. Luckily it doesn't seem to phase her too much and she hopefully won't be deterred.
-
I couldn't agree more. What has to have happened in your life to make you the sort of person who bad mouths a teenager who through the strength of her convictions has inspired millions of people into action for the good of everyone... including those pathetic adults insulting her. Luckily it doesn't seem to phase her too much and she hopefully won't be deterred.
There's lots of bitter, twisted people (and trolls) about, and this forum is no exception. Personally I find Greta and her cause somewhat naive but then that's to be expected - she is a young girl - if she and like-minded children are guilty of naivety then that's really not surprising but as you say well done them for doing all they can do within their limited power to highlight an issue which challenges every living organism on the planet.
-
There isn't much time left.
There's too much CO2.
We need to act now on the climate crisis, there's only one solution........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwUTVUwB7A
-
There isn't much time left.
There's too much CO2.
We need to act now on the climate crisis, there's only one solution........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwUTVUwB7A (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwUTVUwB7A)
LOL !!! Well it should be tender... yum, yum. Teenage mass hysteria at its finest.
-
LOL !!! Well it should be tender... yum, yum. Teenage mass hysteria at its finest.
Indeed! how the salem witches were'found out' finger pointing and all that jass.
Back in the day the fundamentalist climate movement could be compared to the following...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU
They made it up! and their science is....well similar in some ways.
-
There's lots of bitter, twisted people (and trolls) about, and this forum is no exception. Personally I find Greta and her cause somewhat naive but then that's to be expected - she is a young girl - if she and like-minded children are guilty of naivety then that's really not surprising but as you say well done them for doing all they can do within their limited power to highlight an issue which challenges every living organism on the planet.
The poor girl is merely a stooge for those with vested interest.
-
Taking the piss out of a 16 year old girl with Aspergers because she was momentarily overwhelmed in a press conference? Not an attractive quality IMO.
Stupid girl should go home to mummy because she and her hysterics are not helpful.
-
China is the biggest contributor of Co2 emissions.
I'd like to see Greta Thunberg & Extinction Rebellion activist travel to China & stage protest there.
-
China is the biggest contributor of Co2 emissions.
I'd like to see Greta Thunberg & Extinction Rebellion activist travel to China & stage protest there.
Would she be allowed to enter the country?
-
Stupid girl should go home to mummy because she and her hysterics are not helpful.
Not helpful to whom? Do you think little girls and women should be seen and not heard?
-
Would she be allowed to enter the country?
She wouldn't dare go there & neither would the Extinction Rebellion crusties.
They'd be banged up.
If ER are serious they should be gluing themselves to the Chinese embassy.
-
She wouldn't dare go there & neither would the Extinction Rebellion crusties.
They'd be banged up.
If ER are serious they should be gluing themselves to the Chinese embassy.
She’s sixteen. Maybe when she’s older she will martyr herself to the cause. That would only make you hate her more though, because whatever she does you obviously think she’s beneath contempt. That’s because you’re a misogynistic white gammon male who probably thinks Jeremy Clarkson is the dog’s.
-
She’s sixteen. Maybe when she’s older she will martyr herself to the cause. That would only make you hate her more though, because whatever she does you obviously think she’s beneath contempt. That’s because you’re a misogynistic white gammon male who probably thinks Jeremy Clarkson is the dog’s.
I don't hate her at all, I just fail to see how playing truant is going to stop China building more coal fired power stations.
-
She’s sixteen. Maybe when she’s older she will martyr herself to the cause. That would only make you hate her more though, because whatever she does you obviously think she’s beneath contempt. That’s because you’re a misogynistic white gammon male who probably thinks Jeremy Clarkson is the dog’s.
It's quite disgraceful the manner in which this child is being exploited.
-
I don't hate her at all, I just fail to see how playing truant is going to stop China building more coal fired power stations.
What do you suggest then?
-
It's quite disgraceful the manner in which this child is being exploited.
Exploited by whom?
-
What do you suggest then?
Human extinction, it's a guaranteed way to save the planet.
No humans, no pollution. Simple.
-
Failing that, pitch a tent in Trafalgar Square. That'll work.
-
Human extinction, it's a guaranteed way to save the planet.
No humans, no pollution. Simple.
So you advocate encouraging the Chinese to build more coal fire powerplants whilst actively support the complete destruction of thr Amazon rainforest then? That will help to hasten our demise. You are the opposite of Extinction Rebellion, you should start a new movement entitled Extinction Celebration. Perhaps you could be the figurehead - I’m sure the Chinese won’t bang you up, and Trump will probably give you a medal.
-
Failing that, pitch a tent in Trafalgar Square. That'll work.
No. Far better would be if we all pretended everything is just fine and dandy and shoot anyone who points out that the planet is in trouble.
-
No. Far better would be if we all pretended everything is just fine and dandy and shoot anyone who points out that the planet is in trouble.
The planet isn't in trouble.
When I went out this morning the sun shone, the birds sang & there was oxygen to inhale, just like there has been for countless millennia.
-
The planet isn't in trouble.
When I went out this morning the sun shone, the birds sang & there was oxygen to inhale, just like there has been for countless millennia.
So why are you advocating human extinction if everything is just fine?
-
So why are you advocating human extinction if everything is just fine?
You know how it works by now, I take a contrary position to almost every popular opinion.
I like your idea of Extinction Celebration.
Someone beat me to it.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qSluj1x0Jw&fbclid=IwAR3pJ_bWI9YSvQ4J-7ZKroS_Th6vLyBJ4sbL3TsXlmNBBVBcBQ0U-RlNkFQ
-
You know how it works by now, I take a contrary position to almost every popular opinion.
I like your idea of Extinction Celebration.
Someone beat me to it.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qSluj1x0Jw&fbclid=IwAR3pJ_bWI9YSvQ4J-7ZKroS_Th6vLyBJ4sbL3TsXlmNBBVBcBQ0U-RlNkFQ
Anyone would think you were a troll @)(++(*
-
I'm more a WUM than a troll.
-
I'm more a WUM than a troll.
wum
It is an acronym meaning Wind-Up Merchant.
It refers to someone who posts on message boards and newsgroups with the intention to cause as much disruption as possible by goading others.
And this differs from a troll how exactly?
-
I consider wumming to be more mild mannered than trolling.
A troll would be someone who is abusive to others.
I don't abuse anyone. Except the McCanns, but then, they deserve it.
-
I consider wumming to be more mild mannered than trolling.
A troll would be someone who is abusive to others.
I don't abuse anyone. Except the McCanns, but then, they deserve it.
If you’re abusive then you’re a troll, you say. Well you’ve repeatedly sneered at the efforts of a 16 year old girl who is bravely putting her head above the parapet to get shot at repeatedly by bully-boy climate change deniers, is that not abusive? IMO yes it is. You can disagree with her stance without making glib comments about bunking school and playing with dolls but I realise this would require some thought and intelligence.
-
If you’re abusive then you’re a troll, you say. Well you’ve repeatedly sneered at the efforts of a 16 year old girl who is bravely putting her head above the parapet to get shot at repeatedly by bully-boy climate change deniers, is that not abusive? IMO yes it is. You can disagree with her stance without making glib comments about bunking school and playing with dolls but I realise this would require some thought and intelligence.
Look now who is being abusive!
Greta Thunberg offers no real solution to this climate crisis, which isn't happening.
As I understand it, she & some other ankle biters have made a legal complaint about several countries & their Co2 emissions. (not including India & China, 2 of the worst polluters)
She hasn't once mentioned China during her tantrums, as far as I'm aware.
It's all very well her getting angry but it isn't going to do anything other than wind people up & scare kids into believing we're all doomed (before they bury their heads back in their i phones, made with precious metals mined by impoverished African children in conflict zones).
-
Look now who is being abusive!
Greta Thunberg offers no real solution to this climate crisis, which isn't happening.
As I understand it, she & some other ankle biters have made a legal complaint about several countries & their Co2 emissions. (not including India & China, 2 of the worst polluters)
She hasn't once mentioned China during her tantrums, as far as I'm aware.
It's all very well her getting angry but it isn't going to do anything other than wind people up & scare kids into believing we're all doomed (before they bury their heads back in their i phones, made with precious metals mined by impoverished African children in conflict zones).
I don't believe my post was abusive, why do you claim it was?
It was my understanding that Greta recently attended a UN conference of world leaders to discuss climate change and that her comments did not single out India and China for exemption from doing their bit to address the issues of climate change. Perhaps you could confirm otherwise? It is also my understanding that it is not Greta's role in this to present solutions to climate change, but simply to raise awareness of the issue and to keep it in the public eye, and to keep pressure on those who can offer solutions to come up with them. Now tell me that this is a very bad and stupid thing to do, why don't you...?
-
I don't believe my post was abusive, why do you claim it was?
It was my understanding that Greta recently attended a UN conference of world leaders to discuss climate change and that her comments did not single out India and China for exemption from doing their bit to address the issues of climate change. Perhaps you could confirm otherwise? It is also my understanding that it is not Greta's role in this to present solutions to climate change, but simply to raise awareness of the issue and to keep it in the public eye, and to keep pressure on those who can offer solutions to come up with them. Now tell me that this is a very bad and stupid thing to do, why don't you...?
What solutions are there to come up with?
It's a pointless waste of oxygen.
The ceaseless increase in human population is the crux of the problem, Yet no one is addressing that.
This endless expansion of humanity on the earth demand food, housing & electricity.
There are a finite amount of resources on the planet, compared to an almost infinite demand.
The best way to save the planet is by people stopping breeding.
-
What solutions are there to come up with?
It's a pointless waste of oxygen.
The ceaseless increase in human population is the crux of the problem, Yet no one is addressing that.
This endless expansion of humanity on the earth demand food, housing & electricity.
There are a finite amount of resources on the planet, compared to an almost infinite demand.
The best way to save the planet is by people stopping breeding.
The population is not on a ceaseless increase, it is projected to start to decline around the turn of this century even without the help of global warming killing millions of us off. The way to address overbreeding is through education and improved health and living standards, so why not strive also to address pollution, over reliance on fossil fuels, plastics whilst we're at it? Or are you just gonna roll over and die cos you simply cant be bothered? Fortunately the human race is a resilient and ingenious one, but there's no harm giving it a collective kick up the arse every now and again, which is where Greta and her tantrumming babies come into it. Good on her for kicking world leaders' collectives arses. You should be applauding her courage IMO not sneering at her attempts, no matter how ineffective you believe them to be. Why SHOULDN'T world leaders be held accountable for their (in) actions by the adults of the future?
-
I used to despair at the lack of interest that younger generation seemed to have in anything outside of their immediate circle of friends and family but the fact that so many young people are now far more switched on to the issues of the day, and politics in general is a good thing imo. Go Greta, keep on kicking against the pricks, I say!
-
"The world's population is projected to nearly stop growing by the end of the century due in large part to falling global fertility rates, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of new data from the United Nations. By 2100, the world's population is projected to reach approximately 10.9 billion, with annual growth of less than 0.1% -- a steep decline from current levels. Between 1950 and today, the world's population grew between 1% and 2% each year, with the number of people rising from 2.5 billion to more than 7.7 billion.
The report also found the world's population is getting older, with people over the age of 65 being the fastest-growing age group. "One in four people living in Europe and Northern America could be 65 years or older by 2050," reports USA Today. "And the number of people age 80 or over is projected to triple globally, from 143 million in 2019 to 426 million in 2050."
As for the global fertility rate, it fell from 3.2 births per woman in 1990 to 2.5 in 2019 and is projected to decline even further to 2.2 in 2050".
-
The population is not on a ceaseless increase, it is projected to start to decline around the turn of this century even without the help of global warming killing millions of us off. The way to address overbreeding is through education and improved health and living standards, so why not strive also to address pollution, over reliance on fossil fuels, plastics whilst we're at it? Or are you just gonna roll over and die cos you simply cant be bothered? Fortunately the human race is a resilient and ingenious one, but there's no harm giving it a collective kick up the arse every now and again, which is where Greta and her tantrumming babies come into it. Good on her for kicking world leaders' collectives arses. You should be applauding her courage IMO not sneering at her attempts, no matter how ineffective you believe them to be. Why SHOULDN'T world leaders be held accountable for their (in) actions by the adults of the future?
The biggest population increases will be in African shit hole countries & in India & China & alike.
I don't think it likely any of them will be giving a damn about the environment or of the opinions of privileged western school girls.
-
The biggest population increases will be in African shit hole countries & in India & China & alike.
I don't think it likely any of them will be giving a damn about the environment or of the opinions of privileged western school girls.
You’re really not interested in discussing this subject like an adult IMO. Never mind. Carrying on being a silly WUM on a backwater internet forum, I’m sure that’s WAY more worthwhile than anything Greta’s doing.
-
You’re really not interested in discussing this subject like an adult IMO. Never mind. Carrying on being a silly WUM on a backwater internet forum, I’m sure that’s WAY more worthwhile than anything Greta’s doing.
I'll take the topic seriously when the extinction protesters start campaigning in the right direction, which is outside the Chinese Embassy.
-
I'll take the topic seriously when the extinction protesters start campaigning in the right direction, which is outside the Chinese Embassy.
I don't really think you understand what Extinction Rebellion campaign is about. It is a worldwide movement of protest against the governments of each of the countries in which activism is taking place. So, in this country they are targetting the UK government, not the Chinese embassy. And I'm sure if they did set up camp outside the Chinese embassy you'd sneer at them all the same. Come on, be honest now.
-
I don't really think you understand what Extinction Rebellion campaign is about. It is a worldwide movement of protest against the governments of each of the countries in which activism is taking place. So, in this country they are targetting the UK government, not the Chinese embassy. And I'm sure if they did set up camp outside the Chinese embassy you'd sneer at them all the same. Come on, be honest now.
Like I said yesterday, the UK contributes a massive 1% of global carbon emissions!
The UK has reduced it's carbon footprint significantly in the last few decades.
We are not the problem. China is. The developing third world is.
If they set up camp outside the Chinese Embassy I'd back them 100%.
But they are not going to.
They are just going to disrupt peoples lives & waste police resources in the capital & it's going to achieve precisely f..k all.
-
Like I said yesterday, the UK contributes a massive 1% of global carbon emissions!
The UK has reduced it's carbon footprint significantly in the last few decades.
We are not the problem. China is. The developing third world is.
If they set up camp outside the Chinese Embassy I'd back them 100%.
But they are not going to.
They are just going to disrupt peoples lives & waste police resources in the capital & it's going to achieve precisely f..k all.
Oh right, so we don’t outsource most of our manufacturing to the Far East then?
-
Oh right, so we don’t outsource most of our manufacturing to the Far East then?
Consumer demand must be met somehow.
I've been watching the XR protests on facebook,
The protester all have mobile phones & clothes & stuff that are probably made in Taiwan.
They are hypocrites all of them. They should be dressed in potato sacks & eating homegrown veg.
-
Consumer demand must be met somehow.
I've been watching the XR protests on facebook,
The protester all have mobile phones & clothes & stuff that are probably made in Taiwan.
They are hypocrites all of them. They should be dressed in potato sacks & eating homegrown veg.
All of them? How can you possibly state that with any certainty? You don't think any of them has made any significant lifestyle changes to help mitigate their carbon footprint, such as eating less meat, wearing second-hand clothes, growing their own vegetables, riding bicycles instead of driving cars, holidaying in the UK rather than flying to Thailand, supporting local businesses, fitting solar panels to their roofs, etc etc etc? You can tell all this from looking at a video on Facebook? Wow, well done you.
-
Consumer demand must be met somehow.
I've been watching the XR protests on facebook,
The protester all have mobile phones & clothes & stuff that are probably made in Taiwan.
They are hypocrites all of them. They should be dressed in potato sacks & eating homegrown veg.
Wearing their paper shoes which they walked for miles in to get to London...
Ganzhou Huangjin Airport with high speed train station would be a great place for protests... Or Tiananmen Square ?
With the population of the UK legal residents being over 65million and a hand ful of 'protestors' making demands on make believe science is funny. No, really, it is funny. as in hahahahaha. They are just rebels without a real cause that doesn't affects the rest of us. Minorities should be seen and heard and patted on the head.
I just wonder if Greta will tell us about water irrigation to water crops and if more crops are to be grown would that not cause a drought? Almonds and Avocadoes 'clean food' certainly a climate alarmist agenda.
I enjoyed the clip where the guy was stumped for words when talking about extinction- and the dinosaurs- apparently we the humans couldn't save them. Oh a warning to us all!.
-
Wearing their paper shoes which they walked for miles in to get to London...
Ganzhou Huangjin Airport with high speed train station would be a great place for protests... Or Tiananmen Square ?
With the population of the UK legal residents being over 65million and a hand ful of 'protestors' making demands on make believe science is funny. No, really, it is funny. as in hahahahaha. They are just rebels without a real cause that doesn't affects the rest of us. Minorities should be seen and heard and patted on the head.
I just wonder if Greta will tell us about water irrigation to water crops and if more crops are to be grown would that not cause a drought? Almonds and Avocadoes 'clean food' certainly a climate alarmist agenda.
I enjoyed the clip where the guy was stumped for words when talking about extinction- and the dinosaurs- apparently we the humans couldn't save them. Oh a warning to us all!.
Really funny as in hahahaha = this post.
-
https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-elite-machine-behind-greta-thunberg/
-
https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-elite-machine-behind-greta-thunberg/
Tinfoil hat brigade
“Although Greta might be genuinely concerned about climate change, those behind her have a much darker agenda: To create a generation of children riddled with anxiety and depression, giving the elite carte blanche for drastic measures, ranging from tax hikes to the loss of personal freedoms. And let’s not forget the main goal of it all (which is also the main goal of the elite organizations behind Greta): The creation of a single world government, ruled by the world elite … to combat climate change, of course”.
I expect the Jews are behind it somehow. Or the lizards.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Vigilant_Citizen
-
making demands on make believe science is funny. No, really, it is funny. as in hahahahaha.
"Make believe science" that 97% of scientists agree with but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise.
Greta's message isn't about herself. She quite literally says "don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
-
"Make believe science" that 97% of scientists agree with but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise.
Greta's message isn't about herself. She quite literally says "don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
People like Miss Taken are sick and tired of experts, didn’t you know? Michael Gove told us that ages ago!
-
"Make believe science" that 97% of scientists agree with but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise.
Greta's message isn't about herself. She quite literally says "don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
"that 97% of scientists agree with "
I am sorry can you please provide the data to back up your claims- thanks in advance.
"but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise. "
I have 2 hon BS'c degrees and a PHD.. does that count?, can I really call myself a scientist? Yeah, I think so.
"don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
The problem is the climate change experts are not scientists with the correct credentials hence the hysteria.
There are a lot of scientists with different opinions, and with evidence to back up the crap being sold as climate change and the sky is falling mentality.
So Dear Greta look up the word ' predicting global warming ' AKA Climate change, and you will be very surprised that a prediction is ..well... it is a guess. ppft
I predict Jesus will return just after coronation street after next Friday.
I also predict snow in winter and sun in the summertime. I could be wrong but...
-
"that 97% of scientists agree with "
I am sorry can you please provide the data to back up your claims- thanks in advance.
"but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise. "
I have 2 hon BS'c degrees and a PHD.. does that count?, can I really call myself a scientist? Yeah, I think so.
"don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
The problem is the climate change experts are not scientists with the correct credentials hence the hysteria.
There are a lot of scientists with different opinions, and with evidence to back up the crap being sold as climate change and the sky is falling mentality.
So Dear Greta look up the word ' predicting global warming ' AKA Climate change, and you will be very surprised that a prediction is ..well... it is a guess. ppft
I predict Jesus will return just after coronation street after next Friday.
I also predict snow in winter and sun in the summertime. I could be wrong but...
Wow you have 2 BSC’s and a PHD and yet you still struggle to write a coherent sentence or spell. Standards sure have slipped! No doubt you have dyslexia and the IQ of Einstein squared too.
-
"that 97% of scientists agree with "
I am sorry can you please provide the data to back up your claims- thanks in advance.
"but you know better because of......... erm......... all your scientific expertise. "
I have 2 hon BS'c degrees and a PHD.. does that count?, can I really call myself a scientist? Yeah, I think so.
"don't listen to me, listen to the experts!" But you don't want to do that because....... you are the expert??
The problem is the climate change experts are not scientists with the correct credentials hence the hysteria.
There are a lot of scientists with different opinions, and with evidence to back up the crap being sold as climate change and the sky is falling mentality.
So Dear Greta look up the word ' predicting global warming ' AKA Climate change, and you will be very surprised that a prediction is ..well... it is a guess. ppft
I predict Jesus will return just after coronation street after next Friday.
I also predict snow in winter and sun in the summertime. I could be wrong but...
I think a scientist would know that BSc is not spelt BS'c....so I dont think you are a scientist ....BS stands for something quite dfferent ...something you speak a lot of. Your posts are full of it
-
I............. am........... gooing............ to ..................teesh............... prooper............ grandmar.
Not only do they fall.. they fall hard and look up to see who sent them down.
(&^&
For people who claim to not be interested in anything I have to say, they spend a lot of time going over every word witha fine tooth comb.. for what I ask.
Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep looking!
set up? who me? NEVER! ^*&&
-
I............. am........... gooing............ to ..................teesh............... prooper............ grandmar.
Not only do they fall.. they fall hard and look up to see who sent them down.
(&^&
For people who claim to not be interested in anything I have to say, they spend a lot of time going over every word witha fine tooth comb.. for what I ask.
Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep looking!
set up? who me? NEVER! ^*&&
“they goad and seek a reply to goad again” - Miss Taken Identity.
-
I am sorry can you please provide the data to back up your claims- thanks in advance.
If you google The Consensus Project they studied thousands of scientific climate change papers to see what percentage agreed. It came out at 97%.
Nasa did a similar thing and it came out between 90 - 100%.
Out of interest what are your two degrees and PhD in? Climate related sciences?
The problem is the climate change experts are not scientists with the correct credentials hence the hysteria
Well this is a sweeping statement that has no basis in reality. You can not dismiss all climate change experts in that way, have you checked ALL their credentials? No!
-
If you google The Consensus Project they studied thousands of scientific climate change papers to see what percentage agreed. It came out at 97%.
Nasa did a similar thing and it came out between 90 - 100%.
Out of interest what are your two degrees and PhD in? Climate related sciences?
Well this is a sweeping statement that has no basis in reality. You can not dismiss all climate change experts in that way, have you checked ALL their credentials? No!
I’d ask for a cite from Two Degrees Jackson, but she’d almost certainly not be able to provide one.
-
Ok here is how it works.
I will give scientist 2 mill to research something I want to sell. to make more money.
Scientists come up with the correct answer. I have explained this before. Ask the correct people the correct question you will get your answer. as an example 100% people questioned are you a catholic replied Yes.
This was taken out side a catholic church after mass.
Hmm
Hello Can oyu and Greta challenge this guy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v8ZPil4wbs
-
Ok here is how it works.
I will give scientist 2 mill to research something I want to sell. to make more money.
Scientists come up with the correct answer. I have explained this before. Ask the correct people the correct question you will get your answer. as an example 100% people questioned are you a catholic replied Yes.
This was taken out side a catholic church after mass.
Hmm
Hello Can oyu and Greta challenge this guy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v8ZPil4wbs
your expert from the first video
Moore is often incorrectly referred to as a founder of Greenpeace. According to a statement by Greenpeace, “Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace.” [49], [4]
Although Moore worked with Greenpeace Canada and Greenpeace International between 1981 and 1986, he broke away from the organisation after he concluded that “the environmental movement had abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism.” According to Greenpeace, “what Moore really saw was an opportunity for financial gain. Since then he has gone from defender of the planet to a paid representative of corporate polluters.
-
your expert from the first video
Moore is often incorrectly referred to as a founder of Greenpeace. According to a statement by Greenpeace, “Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace.” [49], [4]
Although Moore worked with Greenpeace Canada and Greenpeace International between 1981 and 1986, he broke away from the organisation after he concluded that “the environmental movement had abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism.” According to Greenpeace, “what Moore really saw was an opportunity for financial gain. Since then he has gone from defender of the planet to a paid representative of corporate polluters.
This is what is expected from the activists who get paid millions to ply their joke science and denial of human rights of the poorest countries.
Moore was one of the founders, he was getting paid as a scientist before and after Greenpeace. He claims it has been overtaken by zealots who are trying to redefine the climate change debate. They say one thing HE is the scientist he says another. And CLIMATECHANGE ACTIVISTS hate anyone who disagrees with them.
"Greenpeace has been charged with obstructing development activities in India by the Government of India in 2013 after intelligence Bureau inputs. Greenpeace India is charged with undertaking protests against thermal power, nuclear power, coal and aluminium mining across the India"
OK let us read what this says.
The CC movement is using Greta(a white middle class privileged spoiled child) to raise cash- so who are they calling out? AND what is their answer to this mad claim about stopping the climate from burning up within 12 years.
Expensive wind and solar power? (&^&
Like very environmentally friendly...
-
Interesting take on CC from Putin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/05/russia-announces-plan-to-use-the-advantages-of-climate-change
Real grown up concern about climate change- without the drama and Fake science.
-
Interesting take on CC from Putin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/05/russia-announces-plan-to-use-the-advantages-of-climate-change
Real grown up concern about climate change- without the drama and Fake science.
I’d be interested in the scientific research that has concluded that global warming is as a result of “some processes in the universe”. Meanwhile, I wonder how that other climate change denier down under is planning to ensure his country doesn’t burn to crisp before the end of the year. Those poor kangaroos and koalas.
-
I’d be interested in the scientific research that has concluded that global warming is as a result of “some processes in the universe”. Meanwhile, I wonder how that other climate change denier down under is planning to ensure his country doesn’t burn to crisp before the end of the year. Those poor kangaroos and koalas.
Some of those fires were started deliberately according to my sister who lives there. The climate change deniers are deniers of fake science. They have another agenda.
There are many more of us believe the Planet will go through many weather systems, as evidenced in the past, caused by the interference of the sun and moon positions. Atmospheric conditions like smog are caused by a build large industrial areas, as is acid rain main cause by natural gasses (volcanic omissions etc;). these are separate issues to be tackled and debated!
What is happening in Australia is a country's worst nightmare! I am shocked at the devastation of human suffering- the deaths and the mass homelessness, family life ruined- and the faun and fauna being wiped out.
Can you give evidence of climate deniers being the cause of this?
-
Would the climate change do you think if you burnt down every single tree on the planet?
-
Would the climate change do you think if you burnt down every single tree on the planet?
The climate would improve dramatically if we burnt down every human, that's for sure.
-
The climate would improve dramatically if we burnt down every human, that's for sure.
Trump’s working on it, don’t worry.
-
The climate would improve dramatically if we burnt down every human, that's for sure.
Yeah but, No But, Yeah But this was tried in the early 20th century- wars and revolutions and stuff.. the climate still changes regardless. I believe once the Extinction rebellion discover in 11 years they are not all dead as Greta promised them- they will have to stop cows farting and cover up em volcanoes to show how they are saving the world.
I offer the challenge to the wokers/ climate change activists come vegans to live as they would have us live just for 2 months. walk to work 35 mile radius to help disabled patients. turn off all heating and electricity, only eat cold unprocessed food ie raw friut locally grown (Yes, you will have no bananas or oranges)- now now no cheating during the winter time darlings. erm no mobile phone or tinternet- or your magic 'eco boat'
Nothing will be imported or exported.
THEN COME BACK WITH YOUR SCIENCE ON THE HUGE IMPROVEMENT YOU HAVE MADE WITH YOUR HEROIC SACRIFICE.
Yeah like that would EVER happen- all talk ... ^*&&
-
At Last...
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/youtuber-naomi-seibt-is-climate-change-deniers-answer-to-greta-thunberg-0jn7bx750
She is being called a denier FFS!
Be kind to Thunberg but nasty to Naomi
hardly tolerant people these climate activists- no debate what so ever.
-
Global Warming can bog off as far as I am concerned. It always has been so. And so shall it always be. I haven't had a decent Summer here for four years now and have almost forgotten what it feels like to be warm.
Greta Whatshername doesn't understand about Trees. Tell her to go out and plant a few more Trees.
-
Pollution, Co2 emissions, the human carbon footprint has been reduced dramatically across the world since the onset of Corona virus.
Greta should be delighted.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/16/asia/china-pollution-coronavirus-hnk-intl/index.html
-
Pollution, Co2 emissions, the human carbon footprint has been reduced dramatically across the world since the onset of Corona virus.
Greta should be delighted.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/16/asia/china-pollution-coronavirus-hnk-intl/index.html
It has cleared the smogg from many heavily industrialised countries- it hasn't changed the climate at all. She will be miffed because people are dying from corona and not from her climate change.
-
It has cleared the smogg from many heavily industrialised countries- it hasn't changed the climate at all. She will be miffed because people are dying from corona and not from her climate change.
I think we need to listen to what she says other wise climate change will kill millions. What she says is listen to the scientists
-
It has cleared the smogg from many heavily industrialised countries- it hasn't changed the climate at all. She will be miffed because people are dying from corona and not from her climate change.
I think it takes more than a few smog free weeks for climate change to start going in reverse.
-
I think we need to listen to what she says other wise climate change will kill millions. What she says is listen to the scientists
Her chosen scientist, because anyone who challenges them is regarded as 'deniers' Her angst is via her parents who know her mental state as being anxiety driven and irrational fear- so here she is screaming about the world ending/planet imploding in 12 years. due to people going about their business. SERIOUSLY. Her parents have an agenda and are using her.
-
I think it takes more than a few smog free weeks for climate change to start going in reverse.
Oh climate change can be reversed by humans- oh I didn't know that can I have a cite with indepth analysis of how this will be achieved.
This lock down is very similar to what Greta et el wants. no cars /buses/ taking people to and from work - get them out of work if their job intails using solid fuels due to the ineffectiveness of wind power.
-
I think we need to listen to what she says other wise climate change will kill millions. What she says is listen to the scientists
I don't see the problem with this. The planet is overpopulated.
-
I don't see the problem with this. The planet is overpopulated.
then you dont understand the problem...millions will die and the world will become inhospitable
-
Oh climate change can be reversed by humans- oh I didn't know that can I have a cite with indepth analysis of how this will be achieved.
This lock down is very similar to what Greta et el wants. no cars /buses/ taking people to and from work - get them out of work if their job intails using solid fuels due to the ineffectiveness of wind power.
I could provide a million cites with i depth analysis but what would be the point? You simply don’t accept it and that is that.
How I like to look at it is say we managed to burn down every single tree on the planet. Would that have any effect on the climate? If not somebody please explain why not? If it would have an effect then we are acknowledging that human actions can have consequences for the climate, something which sceptics refuse to accept.
-
I could provide a million cites with i depth analysis but what would be the point? You simply don’t accept it and that is that.
How I like to look at it is say we managed to burn down every single tree on the planet. Would that have any effect on the climate? If not somebody please explain why not? If it would have an effect then we are acknowledging that human actions can have consequences for the climate, something which sceptics refuse to accept.
Well a hypothesis is just that. What if's.. not an exact science.
How I like to look at it is this what do humans require to survive?
The very basics:
Water- needs to be clean
Food- needs to be produced
Protection from the weather- regardless where on the planet you live. needs to be produced
We do not need houses or cars or planes or phones for basic survival however, as we have evolved these things and stuff have become necessities.
It is also worth remembering another thesis: where did humans come from?
It is believed by me and many like minded people that when our galaxy was created we were a solid ice planet to begin with, as we were within the suns rays and heat source the planet earth got warmer- the ice began to melt. Seas and oceans were sprouting plant life under these waters> followed by micro creatures (bacteria) then came a more solid form bottom feeders then many sea creatures were created followed by amphibians who could survive under and out of water etc and so on.
Now these creatures has no influence over their environment as we do today and yet the planet got warmer- AND don't forget we have seasons as well.
It is not wise to claim the north and south pole is melting during the summer. It always does!!!!
-
Well a hypothesis is just that. What if's.. not an exact science.
How I like to look at it is this what do humans require to survive?
The very basics:
Water- needs to be clean
Food- needs to be produced
Protection from the weather- regardless where on the planet you live. needs to be produced
We do not need houses or cars or planes or phones for basic survival however, as we have evolved these things and stuff have become necessities.
It is also worth remembering another thesis: where did humans come from?
It is believed by me and many like minded people that when our galaxy was created we were a solid ice planet to begin with, as we were within the suns rays and heat source the planet earth got warmer- the ice began to melt. Seas and oceans were sprouting plant life under these waters> followed by micro creatures (bacteria) then came a more solid form bottom feeders then many sea creatures were created followed by amphibians who could survive under and out of water etc and so on.
Now these creatures has no influence over their environment as we do today and yet the planet got warmer- AND don't forget we have seasons as well.
It is not wise to claim the north and south pole is melting during the summer. It always does!!!!
It always does but does it always melt to the same extent every summer, or has the melt increased massively in the last 30 years?
-
then you dont understand the problem...millions will die and the world will become inhospitable
If millions die (preferably billions) there will be less Co2 emissions & pollution, which will make the planet more hospitable in the future, surely?
-
If millions die (preferably billions) there will be less Co2 emissions & pollution, which will make the planet more hospitable in the future, surely?
The damage will already have been done with areas once arable turned into desert
-
I firmly believe that anyone looking forward to a major extinction event on the basis that there are too many polluting people in the world should do the rest of us a favour by stepping up to the mark and doing the decent thing for the good of the planet.
-
I firmly believe that anyone looking forward to a major extinction event on the basis that there are too many polluting people in the world should do the rest of us a favour by stepping up to the mark and doing the decent thing for the good of the planet.
I firmly believe that those who have procreated have no right to whinge about climate change.
They caused the problem.
-
The damage will already have been done with areas once arable turned into desert
There will still be areas of the planet hospitable, provided enough people die & those left behind don't repeat the mistake of creating another glut of humanity.
-
I firmly believe that those who have procreated have no right to whinge about climate change.
They caused the problem.
We have had two kids to replace us when we die. Plus they are both likely to save the world being genii.
-
It always does but does it always melt to the same extent every summer, or has the melt increased massively in the last 30 years?
So what is it you are claiming? the melt has been caused by humans or because we are in the same solar system as the sun? The only predictable thing about the weather is- it is unpredictable.
Having based 30 years of dodgy stats on a planet that is probably millions of years old is futile to predict the future.
Ask the aborigines in OZ... they will tell you about great bush fires from long ago.etc
-
So what is it you are claiming? the melt has been caused by humans or because we are in the same solar system as the sun? The only predictable thing about the weather is- it is unpredictable.
Having based 30 years of dodgy stats on a planet that is probably millions of years old is futile to predict the future.
Ask the aborigines in OZ... they will tell you about great bush fires from long ago.etc
Do you know for a fact that pollution caused by human activity has absolutely no effect on the earth’s climate?
-
Do you know for a fact that pollution caused by human activity has absolutely no effect on the earth’s climate?
Pollution causes ill health,high death rates in large industrialised cities and towns. I am what some would call an environmentalist- with reason- I do care about the planet you know!
Does it affect the climate I would have to say no. Only because before the industrialisation of our planet was getting warmer from year 1 and cooler due to the sun being in our solar system and its positioning.
That is a fact.
-
Pollution causes ill health,high death rates in large industrialised cities and towns. I am what some would call an environmentalist- with reason- I do care about the planet you know!
Does it affect the climate I would have to say no. Only because before the industrialisation of our planet was getting warmer from year 1 and cooler due to the sun being in our solar system and its positioning.
That is a fact.
OK so could you please explain what has caused the planet to warm up in the past?
-
OK so could you please explain what has caused the planet to warm up in the past?
8)><(
erm The Sun which we orbit in our planetary system... The planets closest to the sun is very hot, those farthest is colder.. does that compute?
Our weather systems are also affected by outside our atmosphere. The moon and the tides -as an example.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/solar-system/our-solar-system/in-depth/
-
8)><(
erm The Sun which we orbit in our planetary system... The planets closest to the sun is very hot, those farthest is colder.. does that compute?
Our weather systems are also affected by outside our atmosphere. The moon and the tides -as an example.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/solar-system/our-solar-system/in-depth/
OK, I see all reasonable discourse has now come to an end. Shame. Ta ta.
-
The impact of trees on the Earth’s climate and what getting rid of them would mean for the planet (bearing in mind that the Earth’s natural forests have reduced massively in the last 100 years).
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190911-what-would-happen-if-all-the-worlds-trees-disappeared
-
Pollution causes ill health,high death rates in large industrialised cities and towns. I am what some would call an environmentalist- with reason- I do care about the planet you know!
Does it affect the climate I would have to say no. Only because before the industrialisation of our planet was getting warmer from year 1 and cooler due to the sun being in our solar system and its positioning.
That is a fact.
There is no doubt the planet has experienced changes in temp in the past and is experiencing change now...its getting warmer. i think you will find the evidence supports the fact that it is caused by man.
I always wondered why when we went to places such as spain for a holiday it was hot in the day and hot at night yet in the desert its freezing at night. when I worked out the answer i understood global warming
-
8)><(
erm The Sun which we orbit in our planetary system... The planets closest to the sun is very hot, those farthest is colder.. does that compute?
Our weather systems are also affected by outside our atmosphere. The moon and the tides -as an example.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/solar-system/our-solar-system/in-depth/
Venus is hotter than Mercury but Mercury is closer to the Sun. Venus has a thicker atmosphere than Mercury - greenhouse gases are trapped - whereas Mercury is an airless planet.
-
So what is it you are claiming? the melt has been caused by humans or because we are in the same solar system as the sun? The only predictable thing about the weather is- it is unpredictable.
Having based 30 years of dodgy stats on a planet that is probably millions of years old is futile to predict the future.
Ask the aborigines in OZ... they will tell you about great bush fires from long ago.etc
do you really think climate change science is based on 30 years of statistics...like most climate change deniers you show almost total ignorance of the true facts.
Paleoclimatology uses data from millions of years ago. The analysis of ice strata goes back around 800,000 years.
scientists have looked at the rise in temperature in the outer atmosphere where theres no carbon dioxide and the inner atmosphere where ther is carbon dioxide. The raise in temp is only in the inner. if the rise in temp was driven by solar activity or inclination the the temp rise would be the same in both...it isnt.
i wont ask you to supply any facts to support your denial because you wont be able to.
-
do you really think climate change science is based on 30 years of statistics...like most climate change deniers you show almost total ignorance of the true facts.
Paleoclimatology uses data from millions of years ago. The analysis of ice strata goes back around 800,000 years.
scientists have looked at the rise in temperature in the outer atmosphere where theres no carbon dioxide and the inner atmosphere where ther is carbon dioxide. The raise in temp is only in the inner. if the rise in temp was driven by solar activity or inclination the the temp rise would be the same in both...it isnt.
i wont ask you to supply any facts to support your denial because you wont be able to.
Can you find cites that back your scientific facts? You are talking about stuff I've never heard of.
-
Can you find cites that back your scientific facts? You are talking about stuff I've never heard of.
which of this have you never heard of
-
which of this have you never heard of
This bit in particular "scientists have looked at the rise in temperature in the outer atmosphere where theres no carbon dioxide and the inner atmosphere where ther is carbon dioxide. The raise in temp is only in the inner."
-
This bit in particular "scientists have looked at the rise in temperature in the outer atmosphere where theres no carbon dioxide and the inner atmosphere where ther is carbon dioxide. The raise in temp is only in the inner."
Ive read lots on climate change and cant find the source for that information... I was quite surprised by it too. If i come accross it again i'll post a link.
-
This bit in particular "scientists have looked at the rise in temperature in the outer atmosphere where theres no carbon dioxide and the inner atmosphere where ther is carbon dioxide. The raise in temp is only in the inner."
That sounds logical Rob. It is the carbon that is being released into the lower atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and by the sea itself that is causing the damage.
As the world's oceans warm, their massive stores of dissolved carbon dioxide may be quick to bubble back out into the atmosphere and amplify the greenhouse effect, according to a new study. The oceans capture around 30 per cent of human carbon dioxide emissions and hide it in their depths.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20413-warmer-oceans-release-co2-faster-than-thought/
-
That sounds logical Rob. It is the carbon that is being released into the lower atmosphere by burning fossil fuels and by the sea itself that is causing the damage.
As the world's oceans warm, their massive stores of dissolved carbon dioxide may be quick to bubble back out into the atmosphere and amplify the greenhouse effect, according to a new study. The oceans capture around 30 per cent of human carbon dioxide emissions and hide it in their depths.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20413-warmer-oceans-release-co2-faster-than-thought/
There is still no reliable evidence (student thesis and pseudo scientist like Davel don't count) to support it is caused by fossil fuels and the alarmists are just that... alarmists.
The ozone layer had a hole causing global warming we are all going to fry...the ozone layer has no hole people.
The planet heats up and cools down over many millenia- end of.
Something else to consider the planet has under the sea volcanoes!
https://www.geek.com/news/nasa-earths-deep-oceans-are-not-getting-warmer-1606209/
-
The impact of trees on the Earth’s climate and what getting rid of them would mean for the planet (bearing in mind that the Earth’s natural forests have reduced massively in the last 100 years).
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190911-what-would-happen-if-all-the-worlds-trees-disappeared
I love trees- and they are said to be the lungs of the earth.
Deforestation is something which can be managed. cut down some and grow others. Scotland/UK gives millions and tax incentives to foreign land owners to 'grow trees' great you say- well sadly no they are planting horticultural vandals namely the conifers. these trees soak up the fertile land of all water in and near it. They can't be used like oak or pine or fruit bearing - they are pointless but they grow fast!!
-
I love trees- and they are said to be the lungs of the earth.
Deforestation is something which can be managed. cut down some and grow others. Scotland/UK gives millions and tax incentives to foreign land owners to 'grow trees' great you say- well sadly no they are planting horticultural vandals namely the conifers. these trees soak up the fertile land of all water in and near it. They can't be used like oak or pine or fruit bearing - they are pointless but they grow fast!!
its not scotland thats the ptoblem...its the amazon rainforest....how many trees are they planting there
-
its not scotland thats the ptoblem...its the amazon rainforest....how many trees are they planting there
Well it's not all bad news! like the coral reef, things die and hen there is rebirth...
http://theconversation.com/good-news-on-rain-forests-they-bounce-back-strong-storing-more-carbon-than-thought-49189
It is worth remembering we do need carbon to survive!
-
its not scotland thats the ptoblem...its the amazon rainforest....how many trees are they planting there
Humans will never be able to replicate and replace the biodiversity of a million year old virign rainforest.
-
Humans will never be able to replicate and replace the biodiversity of a million year old virign rainforest.
Humans can replant- but they don't have to because things will RE grow anyway. The fertile land which spouts from erupting volcanoes. Death and rebirth. I am sure you and Greta, the wee dear she is, are fully aware that the animal kingdom take responsibility for gnawing at plants and trees over the 'millions' of years.
In Scotland we have deer who are responsible for some deforestation , we also have seals who each eat tonnes of fish,
and Pandas eat whole bloody acres of bamboo within weeks! JUST A FEW EXAMPLES... Jungles and forests are full of em.
-
Humans can replant- but they don't have to because things will RE grow anyway. The fertile land which spouts from erupting volcanoes. Death and rebirth. I am sure you and Greta, the wee dear she is, are fully aware that the animal kingdom take responsibility for gnawing at plants and trees over the 'millions' of years.
In Scotland we have deer who are responsible for some deforestation , we also have seals who each eat tonnes of fish,
and Pandas eat whole bloody acres of bamboo within weeks! JUST A FEW EXAMPLES... Jungles and forests are full of em.
LOL. “Gnawing animals” don’t seem to have had much impact on the Amazon rainforest in the last million years, certainly nothing compared to “Sawing humans”.
-
Humans can replant- but they don't have to because things will RE grow anyway. The fertile land which spouts from erupting volcanoes. Death and rebirth. I am sure you and Greta, the wee dear she is, are fully aware that the animal kingdom take responsibility for gnawing at plants and trees over the 'millions' of years.
In Scotland we have deer who are responsible for some deforestation , we also have seals who each eat tonnes of fish,
and Pandas eat whole bloody acres of bamboo within weeks! JUST A FEW EXAMPLES... Jungles and forests are full of em.
seals dont negativley affect fish stocks.....ddi you get that from a conspiracy theory website...you will be claiming corona virus is caused by 5g next
-
LOL. “Gnawing animals” don’t seem to have had much impact on the Amazon rainforest in the last million years, certainly nothing compared to “Sawing humans”.
Well , you have not been in the Amazon rainforrest to know when it developed, and if any of it has been replenished? There have been many bush fires caused by heat and tsunami waves over the millennia we know this because we have coal and charcoal etc.
I love deer roaming about the glens beautiful creatures - but they do need to be managed ,sadly.
-
seals dont negativley affect fish stocks.....ddi you get that from a conspiracy theory website...you will be claiming corona virus is caused by 5g next
Joining the debate to be nasty oh my, what ever floats your boat. I will leave you to your google encyclopedia!
-
Joining the debate to be nasty oh my, what ever floats your boat. I will leave you to your google encyclopedia!
I dontk now why you think its reasonable to belittle google...if you use it...which im sure you do...you would understand how fantastic it is. Do you really not use it....i find that astonishing and impossible to beleive.....google how did the amazon fires start ...you will learn something.....
But how did the Amazon fires start?
The numerous wildfires across the Amazon rainforest are being blamed on cattle ranchers and loggers, who want to clear and utilise the land say environmental organisations and researchers.
-
Well , you have not been in the Amazon rainforrest to know when it developed, and if any of it has been replenished? There have been many bush fires caused by heat and tsunami waves over the millennia we know this because we have coal and charcoal etc.
I love deer roaming about the glens beautiful creatures - but they do need to be managed ,sadly.
I don’t need to have been there to know that it has existed for millions of years and is in the process of being deliberately destroyed by human beings at an alarming rate over a period of just dozens of years.
-
I don’t need to have been there to know that it has existed for millions of years and is in the process of being deliberately destroyed by human beings at an alarming rate over a period of just dozens of years.
To be fair-That is a separate argument. The rainforrests should not be getting over logged- I agree there should be a logging management enforced by law. However, it is a rain Forrest - it will re grow- nothing stays the same. there are many other factors as a well as logging adding to the problem, some I have mentioned.
-
To be fair-That is a separate argument. The rainforrests should not be getting over logged- I agree there should be a logging management enforced by law. However, it is a rain Forrest - it will re grow- nothing stays the same. there are many other factors as a well as logging adding to the problem, some I have mentioned.
My original point is that humans cannot replace or replicate virgin rainforest. Once it is gone it is gone. That is a fact, I see little point in arguing about it any further.
-
My original point is that humans cannot replace or replicate virgin rainforest. Once it is gone it is gone. That is a fact, I see little point in arguing about it any further.
No it is not gone at all. That is the point. Some will go, but plants and trees- bushes re grow- ecology!
I have plants which die in the winter but come back with more fruits and flowers than the previous years - infact sometimes we shave back brutally to make for newer fresh roots and bigger plants. Even in desert areas plants grow!
oh and plenty Co2 and sun rays to make em grow bigger and better!
-
No it is not gone at all. That is the point. Some will go, but plants and trees- bushes re grow- ecology!
I have plants which die in the winter but come back with more fruits and flowers than the previous years - infact sometimes we shave back brutally to make for newer fresh roots and bigger plants. Even in desert areas plants grow!
oh and plenty Co2 and sun rays to make em grow bigger and better!
it has gone ...20 % in the last 50 years. I think you should do some proper research...try google
-
No it is not gone at all. That is the point. Some will go, but plants and trees- bushes re grow- ecology!
I have plants which die in the winter but come back with more fruits and flowers than the previous years - infact sometimes we shave back brutally to make for newer fresh roots and bigger plants. Even in desert areas plants grow!
oh and plenty Co2 and sun rays to make em grow bigger and better!
Those plants haven’t died. They haven’t been chopped down or been burned to the ground. They are deciduous and may look dead when all the leaves fall off in Autumn but the are still alive. Try burning one to the ground and see how many fruits and flowers they bear next year.
-
Those plants haven’t died. They haven’t been chopped down or been burned to the ground. They are deciduous and may look dead when all the leaves fall off in Autumn but the are still alive. Try burning one to the ground and see how many fruits and flowers they bear next year.
Are you seriously saying the logging isn't the only thing but companies are also burning these forests? I need a cite and evidence for that.
However, ecology is a great way to actually study our planet and how it heals itself.
Australian (AND OTHER COUNTRIES)bush fires have been happening for many centuries ask the aborigines! They know that land and its ecological history better than you and Greta and her mob who have lived on the planet for less than 100 years! ppft
-
Are you seriously saying the logging isn't the only thing but companies are also burning these forests? I need a cite and evidence for that.
However, ecology is a great way to actually study our planet and how it heals itself.
Australian (AND OTHER COUNTRIES)bush fires have been happening for many centuries ask the aborigines! They know that land and its ecological history better than you and Greta and her mob who have lived on the planet for less than 100 years! ppft
If you wish to carry on with this discussion in an adult manner I would ask that you stop lumping me in with “Greta and her mob” and dismissing me with silly exclamations and telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about. If you’re cool to continue on that basis I will address the rest of your post..
-
If you wish to carry on with this discussion in an adult manner I would ask that you stop lumping me in with “Greta and her mob” and dismissing me with silly exclamations and telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about. If you’re cool to continue on that basis I will address the rest of your post..
Firstly My post is NOT childish.
I did not lob you in with Greta and her mob in that post. It is clear you are both separate in that sentence with the word and.. " better than you and Greta and her mob who have lived on the planet for less than 100 years!"
The point being- taking snippets of information over a short period of time does not equate to gathering new evidence regarding the planet's behavior.
Re Australia, white people have only been in that continent less than just over one century- screaming about global warming causing bush fires is pathetic and dishonest. Some fires were caused deliberately by pyromaniacs and some by the scorching heat which has always been in Australia for centuries. My sister has an Aborigine as a neighbour- He said the problems about bush fires were written about and known bout before the 'whities' came to our land- his word not mine.
-
Firstly My post is NOT childish.
I did not lob you in with Greta and her mob in that post. It is clear you are both separate in that sentence with the word and.. " better than you and Greta and her mob who have lived on the planet for less than 100 years!"
The point being- taking snippets of information over a short period of time does not equate to gathering new evidence regarding the planet's behavior.
Re Australia, white people have only been in that continent less than just over one century- screaming about global warming causing bush fires is pathetic and dishonest. Some fires were caused deliberately by pyromaniacs and some by the scorching heat which has always been in Australia for centuries. My sister has an Aborigine as a neighbour- He said the problems about bush fires were written about and known bout before the 'whities' came to our land- his word not mine.
If you actually understood anything you would understand that climate science uses data going back hundreds of thousands of years. Do you have any scientific support for your calim that global warming is not man made...not your opinion but something of substance
-
Firstly My post is NOT childish.
I did not lob you in with Greta and her mob in that post. It is clear you are both separate in that sentence with the word and.. " better than you and Greta and her mob who have lived on the planet for less than 100 years!"
The point being- taking snippets of information over a short period of time does not equate to gathering new evidence regarding the planet's behavior.
Re Australia, white people have only been in that continent less than just over one century- screaming about global warming causing bush fires is pathetic and dishonest. Some fires were caused deliberately by pyromaniacs and some by the scorching heat which has always been in Australia for centuries. My sister has an Aborigine as a neighbour- He said the problems about bush fires were written about and known bout before the 'whities' came to our land- his word not mine.
I haven’t once mentioned Australian bushfires. I was referring to manmade destruction of virgin Amazon rainforest which is happening at an alarming rate and which, once it is gone, to be replaced by grassland and bare soil, it is gone. You may be under the impression that this is not a serious issue and tragedy of immense proportions (for wildlife and indigenous populations, never mind the forest itself), but I disagree.
-
I haven’t once mentioned Australian bushfires. I was referring to manmade destruction of virgin Amazon rainforest which is happening at an alarming rate and which, once it is gone, to be replaced by grassland and bare soil, it is gone. You may be under the impression that this is not a serious issue and tragedy of immense proportions (for wildlife and indigenous populations, never mind the forest itself), but I disagree.
I mentioned bush fires as they happen in many countries including south American countries. You mentioned the burning- were you inferring they were done by companies to clear the land?
I think I have proved that I have an interest in ecology. I do care greatly about the planet, I am just not interested in the lies and money being spent on pointless projects in the name of science to 'save' the planet.
The planet has proved over many millennium it can heal itself,offer new birth to islands which become fertile due to under the sea volcanic eruptions. It is a slow process- does this mean I agree with the rain forests being cleared by man for greed- No it doesn't. Or that man is causing the earth to burn up in 12 years- No is the answer.
We have to tell the truth when discussing these issues.
Wildlife is always in danger mainly due to the pecking order of the animal kingdom- they like us humans- are also exposed to the elements of weather causing death and destruction. floods, extreme heat, erupting volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis etc.
Using wind turbines is not ecologically sound. Many birds are being killed, they are not reliable and cost per watt is costing more than the electricity it produces- when it produces. Not financially sound -NOT to mention the materials used and the manufacturing of these Chinese labour (not great working practices or human rights for workers)- we can over look that because their lives are cheap anyway and we are saving the planet afterall.
The global warming scare mongers have a lot to answer to.
Note to those who insist CO2 is bad and killing us and the planet:
https://climatekids.nasa.gov/carbon/
-
I mentioned bush fires as they happen in many countries including south American countries. You mentioned the burning- were you inferring they were done by companies to clear the land?
I think I have proved that I have an interest in ecology. I do care greatly about the planet, I am just not interested in the lies and money being spent on pointless projects in the name of science to 'save' the planet.
The planet has proved over many millennium it can heal itself,offer new birth to islands which become fertile due to under the sea volcanic eruptions. It is a slow process- does this mean I agree with the rain forests being cleared by man for greed- No it doesn't. Or that man is causing the earth to burn up in 12 years- No is the answer.
We have to tell the truth when discussing these issues.
Wildlife is always in danger mainly due to the pecking order of the animal kingdom- they like us humans- are also exposed to the elements of weather causing death and destruction. floods, extreme heat, erupting volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis etc.
Using wind turbines is not ecologically sound. Many birds are being killed, they are not reliable and cost per watt is costing more than the electricity it produces- when it produces. Not financially sound -NOT to mention the materials used and the manufacturing of these Chinese labour (not great working practices or human rights for workers)- we can over look that because their lives are cheap anyway and we are saving the planet afterall.
The global warming scare mongers have a lot to answer to.
Note to those who insist CO2 is bad and killing us and the planet:
https://climatekids.nasa.gov/carbon/
Yes companies are clearing rainforest by burning it. Have you not heard the term “slash and burn”? I expect you know alot more about it than the Rainforest Aliance, which is probably just some sinister lefty organisation as far as you’re concerned, but perhaps if you could refute this with some actual facts, that would be great
https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/articles/why-our-forests-are-burning
-
Yes companies are clearing rainforest by burning it. Have you not heard the term “slash and burn”? I expect you know alot more about it than the Rain forest Alliance, which is probably just some sinister lefty organisation as far as you’re concerned, but perhaps if you could refute this with some actual facts, that would be great
https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/articles/why-our-forests-are-burning
The sarcasm never did work for me. Just say what you have to say and I will reply.
I have never made any comment/accusation regarding "Rainforest Aliance"
I have never claimed to hold more information about Rain forest Alliance- why you want to say I did or infer I have a derogatory opinion says more about you.
I have never heard of the term slash and burn- I did ask you in previous posts if companies were doing this. You didn't reply.
-
The sarcasm never did work for me. Just say what you have to say and I will reply.
I have never made any comment/accusation regarding "Rainforest Aliance"
I have never claimed to hold more information about Rain forest Alliance- why you want to say I did or infer I have a derogatory opinion says more about you.
I have never heard of the term slash and burn- I did ask you in previous posts if companies were doing this. You didn't reply.
I suggest you follow the link and you will get your answer.
-
I mentioned bush fires as they happen in many countries including south American countries. You mentioned the burning- were you inferring they were done by companies to clear the land?
I think I have proved that I have an interest in ecology. I do care greatly about the planet, I am just not interested in the lies and money being spent on pointless projects in the name of science to 'save' the planet.
The planet has proved over many millennium it can heal itself,offer new birth to islands which become fertile due to under the sea volcanic eruptions. It is a slow process- does this mean I agree with the rain forests being cleared by man for greed- No it doesn't. Or that man is causing the earth to burn up in 12 years- No is the answer.
We have to tell the truth when discussing these issues.
Wildlife is always in danger mainly due to the pecking order of the animal kingdom- they like us humans- are also exposed to the elements of weather causing death and destruction. floods, extreme heat, erupting volcanoes, tornadoes, tsunamis etc.
Using wind turbines is not ecologically sound. Many birds are being killed, they are not reliable and cost per watt is costing more than the electricity it produces- when it produces. Not financially sound -NOT to mention the materials used and the manufacturing of these Chinese labour (not great working practices or human rights for workers)- we can over look that because their lives are cheap anyway and we are saving the planet afterall.
The global warming scare mongers have a lot to answer to.
Note to those who insist CO2 is bad and killing us and the planet:
https://climatekids.nasa.gov/carbon/
YOU referred to this site..climatekids/nasa....have alook at two other pages on the site YOU directed us to ...it explains climate change...what causes it and why its harmful....thats the site YOU linked to
https://climatekids.nasa.gov/climate-change-meaning/
.https://climatekids.nasa.gov/climate-change-evidence/
it also says
There are lots of factors that contribute to Earth’s climate. However, scientists agree that Earth has been getting warmer in the past 50 to 100 years due to human activities.
-
YOU referred to this site..climatekids/nasa....have alook at two other pages on the site YOU directed us to ...it explains climate change...what causes it and why its harmful....thats the site YOU linked to
https://climatekids.nasa.gov/climate-change-meaning/
.https://climatekids.nasa.gov/climate-change-evidence/
it also says
There are lots of factors that contribute to Earth’s climate. However, scientists agree that Earth has been getting warmer in the past 50 to 100 years due to human activities.
"However, scientists agree that Earth has been getting warmer in the past 50 to 100 years due to human activities "
Yes and... we know some scientists are claiming this- this is not news. Other challenge that claim. so all is good .
on an academic level or research.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/environment/antarcticas-denman-glacier-is-sinking-into-the-worlds-deepest-canyon/ar-BB12bRmF?ocid=ientp
-
"However, scientists agree that Earth has been getting warmer in the past 50 to 100 years due to human activities "
Yes and... we know some scientists are claiming this- this is not news. Other challenge that claim. so all is good .
on an academic level or research.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/environment/antarcticas-denman-glacier-is-sinking-into-the-worlds-deepest-canyon/ar-BB12bRmF?ocid=ientp
FromNASA...
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.
-
FromNASA...
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1
Where did the data come from? its the same ole same ole rolled out... Many different journals for and against a THEORY.
show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*
Them what write about it agree (shock horror)why not 100% of the climate change scientist who actively write their journals making claims.
: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.
extremely likely is NOT a scientific certainty= not evidenced- it is a guess!
whood da thunk it!
" In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position".
they (leading scientific organizations worldwide) forget to mention the money. climate change money, to produce papers, based on data which it dodgy. To offer up a theory!
AND they hide their means of gathering claimed authentic data.
Remember the emails? the ones the sceptics took sentences out of context. hahahaahaaha!
"Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails:
(1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions;
(2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and
(3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data."
"Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations.
Can anyone find fault with that statement?
Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures."
“Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”[/i]
play it down...it is there for all to read.
AND...
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
Then...
""Pink elephant in the room" time: There is no impending “ice age” or "mini ice age" to be caused by an expected reduction in the Sun’s energy output in the next several decades.
Through its lifetime, the Sun naturally goes through changes in energy output. Some of these occur over a regular 11-year period of peak (many sunspots) and low activity (fewer sunspots), which are quite predictable. "
So yes, No, we don't know? it depends on where the money comes from I guess. lol
I loved the moon landing TV show.
-
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1
Where did the data come from? its the same ole same ole rolled out... Many different journals for and against a THEORY.
show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*
Them what write about it agree (shock horror)why not 100% of the climate change scientist who actively write their journals making claims.
: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.
extremely likely is NOT a scientific certainty= not evidenced- it is a guess!
whood da thunk it!
" In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position".
they (leading scientific organizations worldwide) forget to mention the money. climate change money, to produce papers, based on data which it dodgy. To offer up a theory!
AND they hide their means of gathering claimed authentic data.
Remember the emails? the ones the sceptics took sentences out of context. hahahaahaaha!
"Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails:
(1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions;
(2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and
(3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data."
"Regarding scientific transparency, a defining characteristic of science is the open sharing of scientific data, theories and procedures so that independent parties, and especially skeptics of a particular theory or hypothesis, can replicate and validate asserted experiments or observations.
Can anyone find fault with that statement?
Emails between Climategate scientists, however, show a concerted effort to hide rather than disseminate underlying evidence and procedures."
“Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” Jones writes in another newly released email. “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.”[/i]
play it down...it is there for all to read.
AND...
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
Then...
""Pink elephant in the room" time: There is no impending “ice age” or "mini ice age" to be caused by an expected reduction in the Sun’s energy output in the next several decades.
Through its lifetime, the Sun naturally goes through changes in energy output. Some of these occur over a regular 11-year period of peak (many sunspots) and low activity (fewer sunspots), which are quite predictable. "
So yes, No, we don't know? it depends on where the money comes from I guess. lol
I loved the moon landing TV show.
your post is just a load of waffle...do you raed the links you provide...you psoted this..
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
did you read it properly...it says climate change seems to hve been driven by soalr change in HIS
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
did you read it...it says climate change appears to be driven by solar activity in HISTORICAL data...thats an accepted fact...but what is also an accepted fact that climate change NOW is being driven by MAN
-
your post is just a load of waffle...do you raed the links you provide...you psoted this..
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
did you read it properly...it says climate change seems to hve been driven by soalr change in HIS
http://temperature.global/?fbclid=IwAR3KLUG7yWknMsg8pKs5eaMW2bl2NRq5opBcKFDifjEGVTORy1umB_OWuhk
There are many different scientist @ NASA. It isn't difficult to find conflicting 'theories'
" Nevertheless, it is clear that solar variability seems much more likely to have driven the large regional climate changes seen in historical data. This provides both a useful test of the ability of climate models to simulate patterns of regional changes and important evidence for the importance of solar variability in climate change."
did you read it...it says climate change appears to be driven by solar activity in HISTORICAL data...thats an accepted fact...but what is also an accepted fact that climate change NOW is being driven by MAN
Of course I read it- the only waffle here is your banal diatribe.
You obviously mis read about the regional warming due to undersea volcanoes, and shifting plates. There is also gas under the sea which can cause small explosions when volcanoes erupt- these are things we cannot see happening with the bare eye.
There is evidence that the sun has been warming the planet for many millennium-no evidence of this due to man. Only theory- aka guess work.
" but what is also an accepted fact that climate change NOW is being driven by MAN" < an add on sentence only accepted by those who believe the theory. I use the word believe as there is NO evidence at all. Some people believe in Gods- that is a theory not a fact but many people claim it as a fact.
-
Of course I read it- the only waffle here is your banal diatribe.
You obviously mis read about the regional warming due to undersea volcanoes, and shifting plates. There is also gas under the sea which can cause small explosions when volcanoes erupt- these are things we cannot see happening with the bare eye.
There is evidence that the sun has been warming the planet for many millennium-no evidence of this due to man. Only theory- aka guess work.
" but what is also an accepted fact that climate change NOW is being driven by MAN" < an add on sentence only accepted by those who believe the theory. I use the word believe as there is NO evidence at all. Some people believe in Gods- that is a theory not a fact but many people claim it as a fact.
volcanos can actually cool the earth...I agree the sun has been warming the planet...thats called stating the obvious...theories supported by evidence are not guesswork.....any claim that you have a scientific background looks ridiculous.
all you are doing is showing just how bankrupt the climate deniers argumnet is.
-
volcanos can actually cool the earth...I agree the sun has been warming the planet...thats called stating the obvious...theories supported by evidence are not guesswork.....any claim that you have a scientific background looks ridiculous.
all you are doing is showing just how bankrupt the climate deniers argumnet is.
OH looks like you lost that argument BIG TIME! MR google scientist you @)(++(*
The planets weather is not caused by 'man' ...can't stop laughing here.
-
OH looks like you lost that argument BIG TIME! MR google scientist you @)(++(*
The planets weather is not caused by 'man' ...can't stop laughing here.
its not my argument...and its not Gretas argument...thats another thing you dont understand.,,
and like anyone with any education...scientific in my case....I use google....do you still pop down to the library LOL
-
its not my argument...and its not Gretas argument...thats another thing you dont understand.,,
and like anyone with any education...scientific in my case....I use google....do you still pop down to the library LOL
Oh I understand your gobble de gook- you and Greta and the hoards believe the scientists. I have no issue with that at all. I just want to see the data-evidence. thanks.
"
and like anyone with any education...scientific in my case.."
?{)(**OK...
"do you still pop down to the library LOL "
Yes, Edinburgh university library- full of books and journals- I though all scientist did. You being the exception of course with your googling. I thought you were quite old, google is relatively new. born again scientist perhaps?
-
Oh I understand your gobble de gook- you and Greta and the hoards believe the scientists. I have no issue with that at all. I just want to see the data-evidence. thanks.
"
and like anyone with any education...scientific in my case.."
?{)(**OK...
"do you still pop down to the library LOL "
Yes, Edinburgh university library- full of books and journals- I though all scientist did. You being the exception of course with your googling. I thought you were quite old, google is relatively new. born again scientist perhaps?
Do you not realise pretty well all these journals are available online.
If i wanted to look at Grimes White paper on cadaver dogs i would use google to find it...download it to my phone and read it over breakfast. You it seems would trot down to the library...who wouldnt have a copy....but the friendly assistant might google it for you ...print it out ...and have a little snigger that you hadnt got the sense to do this yourself at home. Ill stick with google. its a search engine and you dont learn anything from it but it finds the information you want. Ive been using it for about 20 years so its not that new.
-
Oh I understand your gobble de gook- you and Greta and the hoards believe the scientists. I have no issue with that at all. I just want to see the data-evidence. thanks.
"
and like anyone with any education...scientific in my case.."
?{)(**OK...
"do you still pop down to the library LOL "
Yes, Edinburgh university library- full of books and journals- I though all scientist did. You being the exception of course with your googling. I thought you were quite old, google is relatively new. born again scientist perhaps?
evidence for man made climate change.
data over the last 800,000 yeras shows CO2 at highest level...around 30% more than the higest level recorded in the last 800,000 years.
CO2 is agreenhouse gas and causes global warming
Man is responsible for the increased output
thats quite a simple explanation ... it isnt 100% proof but the consensus is overwhelming . One reason all scientists dont agree is because some are employed by the oil and coal industries.
Its like the evidence for smoking...there was enough after the 20 years to show the link but some wouldnt accept it. It took 50 yaers to prove it. we probably will be able to prove 100% climate change is man made in 10 years...but by then too much damage will have been done. Theres a lot of CO2 in the sea and as temp rises more will come out and warming will further accelerate
-
Davel, one thing I’ve learned over the years is to never get into an argument with a manmade climate change denier, they are not dissimilar to Young Earthers in their ability to completely ignore the 99% of scientific consensus in favour of the 1%. I guess it makes them feel maverick and special, they can “think outside the box” you see, and anyway who needs experts and research, that’s all been funded by the High Ups to force us to endure wind turbines and pay over the odds for our energy blah blah blah. Oh and bloody Greta Thunberg! Rant rant rant.
I used to have heated debates with my parents about it 20 years ago and then decided it simply wasn’t worth the bother. Strangely though they have both quietly come round to the view that humanity is largely responsible for climate change. In time and with growing maturity I’m sure others like Miss Taken will too.
-
Do you not realise pretty well all these journals are available online.
If i wanted to look at Grimes White paper on cadaver dogs i would use google to find it...download it to my phone and read it over breakfast. You it seems would trot down to the library...who wouldnt have a copy....but the friendly assistant might google it for you ...print it out ...and have a little snigger that you hadnt got the sense to do this yourself at home. Ill stick with google. its a search engine and you dont learn anything from it but it finds the information you want. Ive been using it for about 20 years so its not that new.
Do you not realise pretty well all these journals are available online.
Now who is stating the obvious
“If i wanted to look at Grimes White paper on cadaver dogs i would use google to find it...download it to my phone and read it over breakfast. “
AND?
"You it seems would trot down to the library...who wouldnt have a copy....but the friendly assistant might google it for you ...print it out ...and have a little snigger that you hadnt got the sense to do this yourself at home."
Oh how you wish that were true! I am even smarter than that, I check the library data base and order my book copy/journal -if they don’t have it they acquire it. Then meet my friends in the library café.
“ Ill stick with google. its a search engine and you dont learn anything from it but it finds the information you want.”
Did it find you someone who would do your scientific paper at your degree level?
Ive been using it for about 20 years so its not that new.
Yes…. I know you must have been.
"evidence for man made climate change.
data over the last 800,000 yeras shows CO2 at highest level...around 30% more than the higest level recorded in the last 800,000 years."
@)(++(* who was around 800,0000 years collating co2 data?
"CO2 is agreenhouse gas and causes global warming" says who you and googleman?
"Man is responsible for the increased output"- evidence please name names and their scientific designation.
“thats quite a simple explanation ...” =Davels drivel
" it isnt 100% proof but the consensus is overwhelming" .
There you have it NO PROOF!
It may be overwhelming you and Greta, (who stopped going to school! )Not to those who actually work in teams to study the planet and made it their life’s work.
“One reason all scientists dont agree is because some are employed by the oil and coal industries.,”
and where does oil and coal come from Davel?
Subtle hint= planet earth!
There are people like me who are very environmentally savvy, we are aware of the ocean’s robustness and its vulnerability. Under the sea volcanoes can cause the ice in both poles to melt slightly- but within years with no more eruptions it can heal itself. As all plant life and forms do.
“Its like the evidence for smoking...there was enough after the 20 years to show the link but some wouldnt accept it. It took 50 yaers to prove it. “
The evidence was again ignorant of facts. And scare mongering.
I am a non-smoker and hate it. However, the evidence gathered did not factor in the general health of the nation and the workforce conditions; for example, lung cancer came under one big umbrella. Where as there are many cause of lung cancer and smoking is just one which can exasperate lung tissue which has been affected by coal fires, wood burners etc which can cause asthma .
If it did cause lung cancer all smokers would die from that disease- many didn’t and smoked for very long periods of time.
“we probably will be able to prove 100% climate change is man made in 10 years...”
probably= google science facts
“but by then too much damage will have been done.”
How much damage ? can you elucidate= earth dies, billions people die..
“ Theres a lot of CO2 in the sea and as temp rises more will come out and warming will further accelerate”
Yes co2 Is in the sea- I told you that, I also said the planet needs Co2 to survive. We all came from the sea -when it melted due to the sun life form began.
-
Davel, one thing I’ve learned over the years is to never get into an argument with a manmade climate change denier, they are not dissimilar to Young Earthers in their ability to completely ignore the 99% of scientific consensus in favour of the 1%. I guess it makes them feel maverick and special, they can “think outside the box” you see, and anyway who needs experts and research, that’s all been funded by the High Ups to force us to endure wind turbines and pay over the odds for our energy blah blah blah. Oh and bloody Greta Thunberg! Rant rant rant.
I used to have heated debates with my parents about it 20 years ago and then decided it simply wasn’t worth the bother. Strangely though they have both quietly come round to the view that humanity is largely responsible for climate change. In time and with growing maturity I’m sure others like Miss Taken will too.
The point is there is NO argument because there is NO proof of these claims, NONE.
-
Davel, one thing I’ve learned over the years is to never get into an argument with a manmade climate change denier, they are not dissimilar to Young Earthers in their ability to completely ignore the 99% of scientific consensus in favour of the 1%. I guess it makes them feel maverick and special, they can “think outside the box” you see, and anyway who needs experts and research, that’s all been funded by the High Ups to force us to endure wind turbines and pay over the odds for our energy blah blah blah. Oh and bloody Greta Thunberg! Rant rant rant.
I used to have heated debates with my parents about it 20 years ago and then decided it simply wasn’t worth the bother. Strangely though they have both quietly come round to the view that humanity is largely responsible for climate change. In time and with growing maturity I’m sure others like Miss Taken will too.
Humanity will disappear in time just like every other animal. Humans might have developed brains but their comprehension of their fragile environment is tempered by greed. Covid-19 has shown what nature can do, in the end the viruses will win imo.
-
Do you not realise pretty well all these journals are available online.
Now who is stating the obvious
“If i wanted to look at Grimes White paper on cadaver dogs i would use google to find it...download it to my phone and read it over breakfast. “
AND?
"You it seems would trot down to the library...who wouldnt have a copy....but the friendly assistant might google it for you ...print it out ...and have a little snigger that you hadnt got the sense to do this yourself at home."
Oh how you wish that were true! I am even smarter than that, I check the library data base and order my book copy/journal -if they don’t have it they acquire it. Then meet my friends in the library café.
“ Ill stick with google. its a search engine and you dont learn anything from it but it finds the information you want.”
Did it find you someone who would do your scientific paper at your degree level?
Ive been using it for about 20 years so its not that new.
Yes…. I know you must have been.
"evidence for man made climate change.
data over the last 800,000 yeras shows CO2 at highest level...around 30% more than the higest level recorded in the last 800,000 years."
@)(++(* who was around 800,0000 years collating co2 data?
"CO2 is agreenhouse gas and causes global warming" says who you and googleman?
"Man is responsible for the increased output"- evidence please name names and their scientific designation.
“thats quite a simple explanation ...” =Davels drivel
" it isnt 100% proof but the consensus is overwhelming" .
There you have it NO PROOF!
It may be overwhelming you and Greta, (who stopped going to school! )Not to those who actually work in teams to study the planet and made it their life’s work.
“One reason all scientists dont agree is because some are employed by the oil and coal industries.,”
and where does oil and coal come from Davel?
Subtle hint= planet earth!
There are people like me who are very environmentally savvy, we are aware of the ocean’s robustness and its vulnerability. Under the sea volcanoes can cause the ice in both poles to melt slightly- but within years with no more eruptions it can heal itself. As all plant life and forms do.
“Its like the evidence for smoking...there was enough after the 20 years to show the link but some wouldnt accept it. It took 50 yaers to prove it. “
The evidence was again ignorant of facts. And scare mongering.
I am a non-smoker and hate it. However, the evidence gathered did not factor in the general health of the nation and the workforce conditions; for example, lung cancer came under one big umbrella. Where as there are many cause of lung cancer and smoking is just one which can exasperate lung tissue which has been affected by coal fires, wood burners etc which can cause asthma .
If it did cause lung cancer all smokers would die from that disease- many didn’t and smoked for very long periods of time.
“we probably will be able to prove 100% climate change is man made in 10 years...”
probably= google science facts
“but by then too much damage will have been done.”
How much damage ? can you elucidate= earth dies, billions people die..
“ Theres a lot of CO2 in the sea and as temp rises more will come out and warming will further accelerate”
Yes co2 Is in the sea- I told you that, I also said the planet needs Co2 to survive. We all came from the sea -when it melted due to the sun life form began.
Your ignorance is astonishing...
do you not understand how we can track CO2 levels over the past 800,000 years...its a fact that we can..
its typical of deniers such as yourself taht you are ignorant of the facts
-
The point is there is NO argument because there is NO proof of these claims, NONE.
no proof yet...just overwhelming evidence
-
Do you not realise pretty well all these journals are available online.
Now who is stating the obvious
“If i wanted to look at Grimes White paper on cadaver dogs i would use google to find it...download it to my phone and read it over breakfast. “
AND?
"You it seems would trot down to the library...who wouldnt have a copy....but the friendly assistant might google it for you ...print it out ...and have a little snigger that you hadnt got the sense to do this yourself at home."
Oh how you wish that were true! I am even smarter than that, I check the library data base and order my book copy/journal -if they don’t have it they acquire it. Then meet my friends in the library café.
“ Ill stick with google. its a search engine and you dont learn anything from it but it finds the information you want.”
Did it find you someone who would do your scientific paper at your degree level?
Ive been using it for about 20 years so its not that new.
Yes…. I know you must have been.
"evidence for man made climate change.
data over the last 800,000 yeras shows CO2 at highest level...around 30% more than the higest level recorded in the last 800,000 years."
@)(++(* who was around 800,0000 years collating co2 data?
"CO2 is agreenhouse gas and causes global warming" says who you and googleman?
"Man is responsible for the increased output"- evidence please name names and their scientific designation.
“thats quite a simple explanation ...” =Davels drivel
" it isnt 100% proof but the consensus is overwhelming" .
There you have it NO PROOF!
It may be overwhelming you and Greta, (who stopped going to school! )Not to those who actually work in teams to study the planet and made it their life’s work.
“One reason all scientists dont agree is because some are employed by the oil and coal industries.,”
and where does oil and coal come from Davel?
Subtle hint= planet earth!
There are people like me who are very environmentally savvy, we are aware of the ocean’s robustness and its vulnerability. Under the sea volcanoes can cause the ice in both poles to melt slightly- but within years with no more eruptions it can heal itself. As all plant life and forms do.
“Its like the evidence for smoking...there was enough after the 20 years to show the link but some wouldnt accept it. It took 50 yaers to prove it. “
The evidence was again ignorant of facts. And scare mongering.
I am a non-smoker and hate it. However, the evidence gathered did not factor in the general health of the nation and the workforce conditions; for example, lung cancer came under one big umbrella. Where as there are many cause of lung cancer and smoking is just one which can exasperate lung tissue which has been affected by coal fires, wood burners etc which can cause asthma .
If it did cause lung cancer all smokers would die from that disease- many didn’t and smoked for very long periods of time.
“we probably will be able to prove 100% climate change is man made in 10 years...”
probably= google science facts
“but by then too much damage will have been done.”
How much damage ? can you elucidate= earth dies, billions people die..
“ Theres a lot of CO2 in the sea and as temp rises more will come out and warming will further accelerate”
Yes co2 Is in the sea- I told you that, I also said the planet needs Co2 to survive. We all came from the sea -when it melted due to the sun life form began.
there is proof...scientific proof that smoking causes lung cancer...again your ignorance is astonishing...you dont appear to undestand scientific principles at all
-
Humanity will disappear in time just like every other animal. Humans might have developed brains but their comprehension of their fragile environment is tempered by greed. Covid-19 has shown what nature can do, in the end the viruses will win imo.
Happy Easter!
-
there is proof...scientific proof that smoking causes lung cancer...again your ignorance is astonishing...you dont appear to undestand scientific principles at all
There is NO Proof it causes cancer. Cancer from smoking can aggregate underlying sometimes unknown/diagnosed factors. If it was the primary cause then everyone who smoked would get lung cancer and as the evidence showns not all people who smoke die of lung cancer.
In am not advocating smoking is good for you- quite the opposite!
Medicine has advanced in some areas. We can now track types of cancer but not always the initial cause of it. and for those who want to know more about cancer we are all made up of Bactria and water, including cancers. something triggers off fatal cancer growths.
None of my family drink alcohol, my grandfather died of liver cancer-at his diagnosis-he was told by his doctor he must be lying about not drinking! The post mortem showed up non alcoholic damage!
-
There is NO Proof it causes cancer. Cancer from smoking can aggregate underlying sometimes unknown/diagnosed factors. If it was the primary cause then everyone who smoked would get lung cancer and as the evidence showns not all people who smoke die of lung cancer.
In am not advocating smoking is good for you- quite the opposite!
Medicine has advanced in some areas. We can now track types of cancer but not always the initial cause of it. and for those who want to know more about cancer we are all made up of Bactria and water, including cancers. something triggers off fatal cancer growths.
None of my family drink alcohol, my grandfather died of liver cancer-at his diagnosis-he was told by his doctor he must be lying about not drinking! The post mortem showed up non alcoholic damage!
you obviously dont understand science....or logic. There is proof. That doesnt mean every lung cancer is caused by smoking.
the following is an accepted fact..
People who smoke cigarettes are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke.
so what is causing this 15 to 30 times increase ......cigarrettes perhaps
Road accidents are often caused as a direct result of drink driving...drink driving causes deaths....do you agree with that...but not every drunk causes a death...do you understand now
-
you obviously dont understand science....or logic. There is proof. That doesnt mean every lung cancer is caused by smoking.
the following is an accepted fact..
People who smoke cigarettes are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke.
so what is causing this 15 to 30 times increase ......cigarrettes perhaps
Road accidents are often caused as a direct result of drink driving...drink driving causes deaths....do you agree with that...but not every drunk causes a death...do you understand now
You can invent your theory. I have claimed smoking is not the PRIMARY cause of lung cancer. If it was all those who smoked would get it and die from it.
The drink driving is just pathetic analog. But we can look at it.
10 drunk drivers driving at 100 miles an hour hit a pedestrian- who is clashed against a brick wall= instant death
all of them die of injuries caused by drunk driver= primary cause.
100 people smoke 40 cigarettes per day for 35 years... do all 100 die from lung cancer? No.because it is NOT a primary cause.
As I have said before it depends on the condition of the lungs at birth and other environmental factors- smoking could probably be attributed to exaggerating the lung condition and cause premature death.
-
You can invent your theory. I have claimed smoking is not the PRIMARY cause of lung cancer. If it was all those who smoked would get it and die from it.
The drink driving is just pathetic analog. But we can look at it.
10 drunk drivers driving at 100 miles an hour hit a pedestrian- who is clashed against a brick wall= instant death
all of them die of injuries caused by drunk driver= primary cause.
100 people smoke 40 cigarettes per day for 35 years... do all 100 die from lung cancer? No.because it is NOT a primary cause.
As I have said before it depends on the condition of the lungs at birth and other environmental factors- smoking could probably be attributed to exaggerating the lung condition and cause premature death.
I dont see youve mentioned the term primary cause before this post so you are now backtracking and making things up...
smoking causes cancer...fact
drink driving causes deaths on the road...fact
That doesnt mean everyone who smokes will get cancer and not every drink driver will cause death
-
I dont see youve mentioned the term primary cause before this post so you are now backtracking and making things up...
smoking causes cancer...fact
drink driving causes deaths on the road...fact
That doesnt mean everyone who smokes will get cancer and not every drink driver will cause death
" e viewing this topic.
Online Miss Taken Identity
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5526
Total likes: 2735
View Profile Personal Message (Online)
Re: Global warming
« Reply #165 on: Today at 12:46:28 PM »
QuoteModify
Quote from: Davel on Today at 12:23:44 PM
there is proof...scientific proof that smoking causes lung cancer...again your ignorance is astonishing...you dont appear to undestand scientific principles at all
There is NO Proof it causes cancer. Cancer from smoking can aggregate underlying sometimes unknown/diagnosed factors. If it was the primary cause then everyone who smoked would get lung cancer and as the evidence showns not all people who smoke die of lung cancer.
In am not advocating smoking is good for you- quite the opposite!
Medicine has advanced in some areas. We can now track types of cancer but not always the initial cause of it. and for those who want to know more about cancer we are all made up of Bactria and water, including cancers. something triggers off fatal cancer growths.
None of my family drink alcohol, my grandfather died of liver cancer-at his diagnosis-he was told by his doctor he must be lying about not drinking! The post mortem showed up non alcoholic damage!
Modify message
"
If you don't look you don't see. Can you see it now?
-
No one is saying smoking always causes lung cancer or that only smoking causes lung cancer. Smoking CAN and DOES cause cancer, irrefutable fact, also heart disease. Some people however are able to smoke 100 fags a day for 80 years and die of old age. They are lucky. Likewise, some people can have unprotected sex with HIV carriers and not get AIDS. Does this mean HIV doesn’t lead to AIDS or just that some people are lucky? What this all has to do with climate change. I forget now.
-
No one is saying smoking always causes lung cancer or that only smoking causes lung cancer. Smoking CAN and DOES cause cancer, irrefutable fact, also heart disease. Some people however are able to smoke 100 fags a day for 80 years and die of old age. They are lucky. Likewise, some people can have unprotected sex with HIV carriers and not get AIDS. Does this mean HIV doesn’t lead to AIDS or just that some people are lucky? What this all has to do with climate change. I forget now.
Oh yeah. Davel took us away with his stats...
" Some people however are able to smoke 100 fags a day for 80 years and die of old age. They are lucky."
Lucky? lol sounds too much like Davels science.
I am saying as with all viruses and bacterias. it is dependent on many factors if you get no/mild/medium/fatal symptoms. Just like smoking it depends on other factors the level of damage to lungs.
So back to Global warming.. Yes the climate will get warmer and cooler throughout time.
-
Oh yeah. Davel took us away with his stats...
" Some people however are able to smoke 100 fags a day for 80 years and die of old age. They are lucky."
Lucky? lol sounds too much like Davels science.
I am saying as with all viruses and bacterias. it is dependent on many factors if you get no/mild/medium/fatal symptoms. Just like smoking it depends on other factors the level of damage to lungs.
So back to Global warming.. Yes the climate will get warmer and cooler throughout time.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas...do you accept that...do you understand what it means...or do you dispute that
-
CO2 is a greenhouse gas...do you accept that...do you understand what it means...or do you dispute that
WE need co2 to survive- FACT! the planet is changing and has been for many millennium- it wasn't long ago people were screeching about a hole in the ozone layer- the sky is falling and we're all gonna die! which miraculously fixed itself. My uncle wrote a paper on it at the time.
Is the climate changing because of fossil fuel, No I don't believe it is. Does having a huge and over dependency on gas and electricity produced by drilling and burning fossil fuels and oil causes ill health- yes absolutely.
Green house gases have yet to be established as bad.
-
WE need co2 to survive- FACT! the planet is changing and has been for many millennium- it wasn't long ago people were screeching about a hole in the ozone layer- the sky is falling and we're all gonna die! which miraculously fixed itself. My uncle wrote a paper on it at the time.
Is the climate changing because of fossil fuel, No I don't believe it is. Does having a huge and over dependency on gas and electricity produced by drilling and burning fossil fuels and oil causes ill health- yes absolutely.
Green house gases have yet to be established as bad.
we need water to survive but we can drown in it...we need lots of things to survive ....sodium in salt for instance but an excess kills us.
Do you understand co2 is a greenhouse gas and greenhouse gases cause temp rise....thats factual. If you dont realise and undersatnd that you really dont understand the basics.
-
WE need co2 to survive- FACT! the planet is changing and has been for many millennium- it wasn't long ago people were screeching about a hole in the ozone layer- the sky is falling and we're all gonna die! which miraculously fixed itself. My uncle wrote a paper on it at the time.
Is the climate changing because of fossil fuel, No I don't believe it is. Does having a huge and over dependency on gas and electricity produced by drilling and burning fossil fuels and oil causes ill health- yes absolutely.
Green house gases have yet to be established as bad.
You do realise that it was manmade CFCs that contributed to the hole in the ozone layer and that since CFCs were banned in the late 80s the issue has more or less been resolved?
-
the best put down EVER, from Greta Thunberg to Andrew Tate (who sounds like just the sort of man Spam wishes he could be) after he trolled her with a request to send her details about his fleet of gas guzzling cars:
“yes, please do enlighten me. email me at smalldickenergy@getalife.com”
Now the most liked tweet in history.
And who said the girl had no sense of humour?
Go, Greta!
-
the best put down EVER, from Greta Thunberg to Andrew Tate (who sounds like just the sort of man Spam wishes he could be) after he trolled her with a request to send her details about his fleet of gas guzzling cars:
“yes, please do enlighten me. email me at smalldickenergy@getalife.com”
Now the most liked tweet in history.
And who said the girl had no sense of humour?
Go, Greta!
I don't do twitter, facebook, instagram, Tik Tok or know who Andrew Tate is.
Is having the most liked tweet in history to be regarded as some kind of accomplishment?
On par with the first winter ascent of the north face of the Eiger or something?
Social media is contributing to the downfall of society IMO, but yeah, go Greta, I suppose.
She has opened the gates on herself now though. If it's fine for her to suggest this Andrew Tate guy has a small penis, then she should have no complaints if anyone comments on her own anatomy really. She's flat chested & fair game now, by her own rules.