Climate Change

I have enjoyed reading this thread at home whilst sat in my shorts and T shirt coz it's too hot to put anything else on. I might have to go out and clean my 1000cc V twin bike or possibly my 1700cc parallel twin bike if not then my 2.4 ltr diesel twin cab pick up then go to work and play around with a twin gas turbine engined helicopter burning 300ltrs an hour. I'm pretty sure my life choices are good

 

.

This fellow is solar powered. All that photosynthesis, muscle mass and tons of methane and bs.....There used to be 60 million of them on the prairies - a mere 2/3 of the current cattle population of North America.

I share your concerns about politicised science. The entire anti globalisation movement and its environmental wing has become a re-homing for anti capitalists. Scientists wouldn’t be so self-interested and venal as to sniff the wind when chasing research grants, would they?



And don’t get me started on the use of children in their propaganda.

 

I will be raising a glass to the memory of a scientist and teacher who enthused so many youngsters with a love of nature - Professor David Bellamy.

He was banished from our screens for referring to man made climate change as ‘poppycock’. He could have used a ruder word.

 

No evidence of climate change?

I hope our antipodean friends are ok, it looks horrendous.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-50879850

 

Hey... no worries.

 

Quite possibly.

The key missing word is ‘anthropogenic’. Or solargenic?

 

Havit, you could always move to Arizona. It's plenty hot here most of the year and I'd prefer it not get much hotter!

 

I don't want to be around when the planet is almost entirely covered in ice again. Count me out.

 

but who to believe?

 

Sky Australia is owned by News Corps whereas Sky UK is owned by Comcast (one of Obama’s biggest Corporate backers). They are quite different animals........

 

I'd like to have seen BOM answer the case put by the woman in that video.

 

While I believe that climate change is driven by human activity, I was interested in a time, not long ago, when cars were seen as the green option, because...

In New York, 60,000 gallons of horse urine and 1,000 tons of horse crap were dumped on the streets...

...every day! Plus dead horses were left to rot at the side of the road. And as Henry Ford said, "you can't fix a dead horse with a spanner".

Edit: I'm reading a book called "Another Fine Mess" by Tim Moore. He is driving a Model T across America via the Trump-supporting states to try to understand why Trump was elected. So far, it's mostly about Henry Ford, the history behind the Model T and it's success, and just how difficult it is to drive one when you're used to the conventional layout of modern cars. Not too much about Trump supporters yet.

 

https://climate.ncsu.edu/edu/Milankovitch

Just remember the greenhouse gases include water vapour, ozone, methane as well as CO2. The science simply isn’t simple or settled......

 

Thank you for the link to that website. I'll spend some time reading the different articles, but what I've seen so far explains and supports the science behind global warming and climate change.

The section on greenhouse gasses that you mention explains how greenhouse gasses keep the planet warmer than it would otherwise be, thus supporting life on earth, but also states:

"However, too much greenhouse warming could raise global temperatures to a level that is significantly different than the current climate."

Interesting that, in spite of the article explaining the difference between global warming and climate change (a difference I already understood), the quote I've just pasted above seems to confuse global temperatures and climate.

Also from the same page on the website:

"The current global average temperature is 59°F (15°C, 288K) and is projected to increase 3-7°F (2-4°C, K) by 2100. It is generally agreed upon that the man-made increase in greenhouse gases due to the burning of fossil fuels is causing or expediting this warming."

The website you referred me/us to doesn't seem to be denying a man-made influence on global temperature and climate change.

 

I favour the balanced approach! The 100% one way or the other sites are literally incredible.
Equally incredible is a 16yr old telling the World they must think as she does (or, more accurately, her handlers - she is tellingly clueless when dragged off script). Since the climate has always been in a state of flux and the science has unquestionably become politicised (if not quasi-religious) objective truth AND THE QUEST FOR IT has gone out of the window.
We unquestionably have issues to do with pollution and deforestation about which we can do a huge amount. I simply don’t buy the ‘emergency ‘ nonsense from re-treaded anti-capitalists. The bitter irony is that it is the wealthiest democracies doing most on all fronts precisely because they can afford to care. Personally I doubt that us increasing naturally occurring CO2 (1.8% of the atmosphere) by .02% of that 1.8% could have the effects claimed. We can’t even effectively monitor what is daily belching out of volcanoes.......

 

She's a mere puppet, I am still going to ride my bike.

 

This seems like a reasonable pitch from someone with the qualifications and authority to back it up:

https://www.climatedepot.com/2017/0...limate-is-pretty-close-to-believing-in-magic/