9 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The voice of reason from the youth generation that listens to the settled science without the blinkers of denial.

Science is never "settled". Back in the dark ages, the science was "settled" that the sun revolved around the earth etc. More recently, scientists claimed that smoking wasn't harmful and that sugar was good for us. In the 80s they told us we were going to have an ice age by now, and that the oil would run out decades ago.

It's the same sort of claim as saying xx% of scientists support man made climate change. There is no way to prove that, as there are millions of scientists around the world, and they haven't all been counted one way or another. One can say a large number of scientists support it but never a defined %.

Not that anybody will watch, but here is a scientific presentation of two qualified experts explaining how they discovered that the greenhouse effect does not function in the way commonly understood, because the atmosphere is in thermodynamic equilibrium. Heating is offset by pressure transference, or pervection. Of course the science is settled so I guess they are too late to be right.

Link

48 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The science is settled. Over 1000 scientists from over 120 countries studied thousands upon thousands of documents and studies and made their conclusion.

 

Perhaps you should have made your own submissions to them.

LOL. How many scientists are there in the world? What % of them is 1000?

How long would it take for each of them to read thousands of documents, let alone thousands upon thousands? I find your statement erroneous.

3 hours ago, DoctorG said:

I might be inclined towards some action if the predictions were anywhere near believable. Attached is just some of the "scientific predictions" that have been made. There are plenty more to be laughed at in other sites.

 

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions

Nonsense. These were predictions made by a few that didn't come true. Not the consensus of the scientific community. Whereas the predictions about global warming are coming true. Average global temperatures have climbed to record heights, glaciers are melting at unprecedented rates, the seas are getting warmer and dealkalinizing etc.

Edited September 21, 20196 yr by bristolboy

This climate protest by the schoolkids and others is really a bunch of <deleted> and just an excuse to take a day off. There has been pictures of some of the grounds after the protests and they look like garbage dumps with all the plastic and garbage left behind by the so called environmental protesters but the media removes the pictures almost as soon as they are posted. If they were so concerned about the environment they wouldn't have to send in cleaning crews and garbage trucks to clean up after they leave.

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. How many scientists are there in the world? What % of them is 1000?

How long would it take for each of them to read thousands of documents, let alone thousands upon thousands? I find your statement erroneous.

I know a few dozen scientists, none of whom are working in the field of climate change.

 

I’m guessing that’s true of the vast majority of the world’s scientists and if so your attempt at numbers gaming is irrelevant.

Edited September 21, 20196 yr by Chomper Higgot

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Science is never "settled". Back in the dark ages, the science was "settled" that the sun revolved around the earth etc. More recently, scientists claimed that smoking wasn't harmful and that sugar was good for us. In the 80s they told us we were going to have an ice age by now, and that the oil would run out decades ago.

It's the same sort of claim as saying xx% of scientists support man made climate change. There is no way to prove that, as there are millions of scientists around the world, and they haven't all been counted one way or another. One can say a large number of scientists support it but never a defined %.

 

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. How many scientists are there in the world? What % of them is 1000?

How long would it take for each of them to read thousands of documents, let alone thousands upon thousands? I find your statement erroneous.

The percentage claim isn't made for scientists. It's made for climatologists. The scientists whose business is it is to study climate. and since the surveys began none have fallen below the high 80's. And that was from the earlier surveys. As time has gone by the percentage of climatologists who accept anthropogenic global warming has only risen.

2 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Not that anybody will watch, but here is a scientific presentation of two qualified experts explaining how they discovered that the greenhouse effect does not function in the way commonly understood, because the atmosphere is in thermodynamic equilibrium. Heating is offset by pressure transference, or pervection. Of course the science is settled so I guess they are too late to be right.

Link

There is a theory that has been around for decades that CO2 in the atmosphere rises BECAUSE of rising temperatures, but does NOT cause it. Seems as reasonable to me as Gore's theory that it is the other way around.

There is more and more evidence coming out against man made climate change being of any significance in global temperature rise but it is being suppressed.

One scientist, Peter Ridd, was sacked from his university for deviating from the preferred dogma, and recently won a 1.2 million $ award from the courts for unjustified dismissal.

The venom a young girl and young people trigger in the usual suspects here on n TVF is quite depressing.

 

 

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

 

The percentage claim isn't made for scientists. It's made for climatologists. The scientists whose business is it is to study climate. and since the surveys began none have fallen below the high 80's. And that was from the earlier surveys. As time has gone by the percentage of climatologists who accept anthropogenic global warming has only risen.

Perhaps you should inform Sujo of that. He posted "Over 1000 scientists from over 120 countries studied thousands upon thousands of documents and studies and made their conclusion". No mention of climatologists.

I was responding to him, not you.

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You want the kids to come up with a solution. Please.

The point is that there is no solution, unless you're advocating a drastic culling of humans.

Ask anyone if they want to go back a to hunting-gathering society, provided there is enough land to sustain a population of 7/8 billions, i think i know what most people would answer.

In a not so distant future, solutions, like alternative energy sources, may be found, but it's a long way to go, and i'm afraid it will take one world government, and a transition from capitalism to socialism, go figure.

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There is a theory that has been around for decades that CO2 in the atmosphere rises BECAUSE of rising temperatures, but does NOT cause it. Seems as reasonable to me as Gore's theory that it is the other way around.

There is more and more evidence coming out against man made climate change being of any significance in global temperature rise but it is being suppressed.

One scientist, Peter Ridd, was sacked from his university for deviating from the preferred dogma, and recently won a 1.2 million $ award from the courts for unjustified dismissal.

Maybe to you, but not to the scientists. This 'I don't like it therefor I disagree' is really ridiculous.

11 minutes ago, Gudge said:

This climate protest by the schoolkids and others is really a bunch of <deleted> and just an excuse to take a day off. There has been pictures of some of the grounds after the protests and they look like garbage dumps with all the plastic and garbage left behind by the so called environmental protesters but the media removes the pictures almost as soon as they are posted. If they were so concerned about the environment they wouldn't have to send in cleaning crews and garbage trucks to clean up after they leave.

It's a classic "do as I say, not as I do scenario".

Just now, mauGR1 said:

The point is that there is no solution, unless you're advocating a drastic culling of humans.

Ask anyone if they want to go back a to hunting-gathering society, provided there is enough land to sustain a population of 7/8 billions, i think i know what most people would answer.

In a not so distant future, solutions, like alternative energy sources, may be found, but it's a long way to go, and i'm afraid it will take one world government, and a transition from capitalism to socialism, go figure.

More nonsense. Alternative energy has already made coal uneconomical and is on the way to doing the same to gas. So no, it isn't a choice between reverting to a stone age lifestyle or advanced technology. In fact, it's advanced technology that is powering the renewables revolution.

2 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

The point is that there is no solution, unless you're advocating a drastic culling of humans.

Ask anyone if they want to go back a to hunting-gathering society, provided there is enough land to sustain a population of 7/8 billions, i think i know what most people would answer.

In a not so distant future, solutions, like alternative energy sources, may be found, but it's a long way to go, and i'm afraid it will take one world government, and a transition from capitalism to socialism, go figure.

And we have to look at those alternative energy sources now, change things now, change our way of living now. The defaitism here is incredible.

30 years ago my Dad summed up similar hysteria with this characteristic one liner when CFC's in airosols & fridges were all the rage:

 

"'ow many o' them CFCs went into all the ordnance expended during WW2?" (as he continued applying deodorant completely unphased by the hype!)

 

It made me laugh & pretty much sums this up.

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

More nonsense. Alternative energy has already made coal uneconomical and is on the way to doing the same to gas. So no, it isn't a choice between reverting to a stone age lifestyle or advanced technology. In fact, it's advanced technology that is powering the renewables revolution.

Thanks for the nonsense, but if it was like you say, we should start to see some progress, while in the reality we have advanced democracies planning wars.

Are modern technology weapons also powering "the renewables revolution" ?

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

30 years ago my Dad summed up similar hysteria with this characteristic one liner when CFC's in airosols & fridges were all the rage:

 

"'ow many o' them CFCs went into all the ordnance expended during WW2?" (as he continued applying deodorant completely unphased by the hype!)

 

It made me laugh & pretty much sums this up.

And then they got banned and the hole in the Ozone layer shrank.

 

what a jolly laaargh.

Edited September 21, 20196 yr by Chomper Higgot

2 minutes ago, evadgib said:

30 years ago my Dad summed up similar hysteria with this characteristic one liner when CFC's in airosols & fridges were all the rage:

 

"'ow many o' them CFCs went into all the ordnance expended during WW2?" (as he continued applying deodorant completely unphased by the hype!)

 

It made me laugh & pretty much sums this up.

Really?

24 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You want the kids to come up with a solution. Please.

Yes. No one should cause chaos in the streets without at least some idea of what they want done about it. I've given my solutions many times over the years on TVF, but I have yet to hear of any workable ones from kids.

Demonstrating without any idea of what to do about it is just being Chicken Little- "the sky is falling, the sky is falling".

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Thanks for the nonsense, but if it was like you say, we should start to see some progress, while in the reality we have advanced democracies planning wars.

Are modern technology weapons also powering "the renewables revolution" ?

Actually progress is being made all the time-albeit in fits and starts.

 

A cursory read of Steven Pinker's book 'The Better angels of our Nature'-would tell you that.

 

Actually the fact that we are having this debate-and the adolescents and young adults contributing to it- should tell you that.

2 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Thanks for the nonsense, but if it was like you say, we should start to see some progress, while in the reality we have advanced democracies planning wars.

Are modern technology weapons also powering "the renewables revolution" ?

So, because advanced technology is used in war, it can't also be used for renewable energy? Really?

 Food is necessary for soldiers.. Does that mean that's all food is useful for?

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And then they got banned and the hole in the Ozone layer shrank.

 

what a jolly laaargh.

1 minute?

You're easier than Mackrel & I wasn't even trying! ????

Edited September 21, 20196 yr by evadgib

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

And we have to look at those alternative energy sources now, change things now, change our way of living now. The defaitism here is incredible.

No defeatism from me, sorry, i am ready to give up a pollutant life-style, but i think we should not be oblivious to reality.

25 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Not that anybody will watch, but here is a scientific presentation of two qualified experts explaining how they discovered that the greenhouse effect does not function in the way commonly understood, because the atmosphere is in thermodynamic equilibrium. Heating is offset by pressure transference, or pervection. Of course the science is settled so I guess they are too late to be right.

Link

Some background information on the men behind that video

 

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2017/07/farmers-journal-is-undermined-by-climate-change-denial/

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

Actually progress is being made all the time-albeit in fits and starts.

 

A cursory read of Steven Pinker's book 'The Better angels of our Nature'-would tell you that.

 

Actually the fact that we are having this debate-and the adolescents and young adults contributing to it- should tell you that.

Yep, i'm having these debates since i was a teen, not losing hope, just looking at reality as it is.

 

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

And we have to look at those alternative energy sources now, change things now, change our way of living now. The defaitism here is incredible.

Only thing the government has actually done in NZ is ban plastic bags in shops ( while allowing everything in the supermarket to be wrapped in non re useable plastic- the plastic bags were re used ), and put taxes up on petrol which isn't going to stop people using cars while public transport is a farce. They want people to buy electric cars even though there is no charging infrastructure and the batteries are highly polluting- being made and when disposed of. Meanwhile they want more planes to bring more tourists to the country so they can drive more campervans around. Hypocrisy writ large.

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

So, because advanced technology is used in war, it can't also be used for renewable energy? Really?

 Food is necessary for soldiers.. Does that mean that's all food is useful for?

Ok, so let the world population adopt a non-pollutant life-style, while the military keep flying drones and rockets.

(sorry for the sarcasm)

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Ok, so let the world population adopt a non-pollutant life-style, while the military keep flying drones and rockets.

(sorry for the sarcasm)

And what's your point? That until drones and rockets are permanently grounded there can be no progress made in slowing and ultimately halting climate change? 

5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Some background information on the men behind that video

 

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2017/07/farmers-journal-is-undermined-by-climate-change-denial/

That's a run of the mill hit piece which addresses none of the science. Just a lot of text trying to fit in words like Trump and Climate denier bla bla. The scientists have put their stuff up for peer review. They seem quite confident.