Does it really matter what Thailand or any country / govt has done.  Why wait for them?

 

What have YOU done ?

 

Still travelling international ?

Still driving fossil fueled vehicles ?

Still haven't gone solar at home ?

 

So you've done nothing ... hmm

36 minutes ago, bert bloggs said:

Not long ago the scientists were warning us about global cooling,what happened to that?

They got stuck in a heated exchange and had to cool off!

So far Thailand bought it's first submarine without an engine....a huge step toward zero emission!!

Don't you just love all the climate change deniers chastising everyone else for being 'woke' and 'getting conned' when the exact opposite is true.  

 

'At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696

 

You are the end result of simple but effective PR and marketing campaign sponsored by the very people that would commercially gain from yours and everyone elses scepticism.

39 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Does it really matter what Thailand or any country / govt has done.  Why wait for them?

 

What have YOU done ?

 

Still travelling international ?

Still driving fossil fueled vehicles ?

Still haven't gone solar at home ?

 

So you've done nothing ... hmm

I have increased my beer intake - so I can recycle the empty bottles.

Win win .

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

I have in another field but nothing to do with science so irrelevant and I also never posted a claim that I did unlike you, if its a problem naming the science discipline, fine, there are dozens of them.

I finished first in Physics and Math at school. Worked in finance modelling.

 

Serious flaws with modelling of any type.

Given Thailand is operating and commissioning new plant at Mae Moh, permit me to doubt the renewables in Thailand are anything but window dressing.

Mae Moh is possibly one of the dirtiest power generators on the planet, because it is fueled with lignite, the lowest form of coal.

The electricity coming from Mae Moh does not know or care when it recharges the EV's their owners are so proud of, because they are saving the planet. Yeah right.

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

Don't you just love all the climate change deniers chastising everyone else for being 'woke' and 'getting conned' when the exact opposite is true.  

 

'At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change'.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696

 

You are the end result of simple but effective PR and marketing campaign sponsored by the very people that would commercially gain from yours and everyone elses scepticism.

What is a denier? Its not 0 or 1. Do some research. Without the facts you dont know any detail.

5 hours ago, JCauto said:

Because they wish to follow the science that overwhelmingly backs such policy?

Perhaps the eminent poster would care to provide their credentials and world-class research that has been peer-reviewed to open a reasonable discussion about minutiae of the policy or scientific consensus? Of course they wouldn't, because the "Climate Change is a hoax" crowd have long coalesced into a confederacy of dunces. But do tell us about it, now that you've exhausted your research on epidemiology or whatever other Youtube U you "graduated" from. 

Unpleasant tone, and ignorant, poorly informed comment.

5 hours ago, mikebell said:

Get a police force: to take out the obvious pick-up polluters.  Get them to descend on every blazing field & jail the farmer.  Ban politicians hiring slow-moving speaker vans.

All very authoritative, but what about those under the table payment options for those....????

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Does it really matter what Thailand or any country / govt has done.  Why wait for them?

 

What have YOU done ?

 

Still travelling international ?

Still driving fossil fueled vehicles ?

Still haven't gone solar at home ?

 

So you've done nothing ... hmm

LOL, you think you are doing something? The EV you are presumably driving - you think that has a lower environmental cost than an ICE? Those batteries filled with toxic materials - do they just evaporate when they go flat? What is the full life cycle cost of a solar panel, when the subsidies are taken out? Geez, some people enjoy kidding themselves.

8 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

Unpleasant tone, and ignorant, poorly informed comment.

When you start presenting facts and data to support your position.................

20 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

I finished first in Physics and Math at school. Worked in finance modelling.

 

Serious flaws with modelling of any type.

yep, even grade c maths should inform pupils that models are only as good as the data imputed. Fortunately the historical data on climate is well evidenced.

10 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

LOL, you think you are doing something? The EV you are presumably driving - you think that has a lower environmental cost than an ICE? Those batteries filled with toxic materials - do they just evaporate when they go flat? What is the full life cycle cost of a solar panel, when the subsidies are taken out? Geez, some people enjoy kidding themselves.

Not kidding myself as I'm:

1. Saving money

2. less air pollution

3. have independence & self control of my living environment

 

Pretty much the only things I care about.   More money in the pocket is always a plus, and less air pollution, who doesn't like that.  Not seeing any negative, all pluses in my world.

 

Global warming, don't care.

But I'm not the ones complaining about countries not doing enough, when they themselves aren't doing anything.  I avoid being a hypocrite .... when possible.

 

Yes, EVs are a bit more eco friendly than ICE, and solar better than most grid power from fossil.  Not much argument about that.   Just saving 1 oil spill on land or sea is worth it alone.

21 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

What is a denier? Its not 0 or 1. Do some research. Without the facts you dont know any detail.

I know this. 

 

'Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt. He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers.'  and also ' the GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming." 'https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696 

 

 

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

yep, even grade c maths should inform pupils that models are only as good as the data imputed. Fortunately the historical data on climate is well evidenced.

Is it? Any figures from 500 years ago? 

15 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I know this. 

 

'Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt. He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers.'  and also ' the GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming." 'https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62225696 

 

 

 

 

 

Thats one guy. Show us the data from 1455 or 1233.

 

Is 1945 avg taken from how many sources?

 

How many sources in 2022 vs 1978?

 

Are the locations the same?

2 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Do some research. Study the data. You will find there is a lot more to the story.

 

Start with 1908 to 1942.

Dude, you're welcome to join the discussion with those people (there are many) who are working in that aspect of Climate Science. I too work in related fields (forest conservation), but different ones than those. I have too much work to casually review the decades of effort in another field I haven't received specific training in. 

But understand that when I say "join the discussion", I mean do what you actually wrote. Do the research in a structured way and compile or source your data and publish your analysis in a credible publication (the bigger the better, but you'd want such groundbreaking stuff to get the widest distribution and receive the most criticism so you can be sure you've got it right). Then you'll be taken very seriously, and your research will be looked at with the aid of fine-toothed combs. Perhaps you're the One, the man who discovered the straw that broke the Climate Change back! You'd be applauded by all of your friends and the fossil fuel industry will lay gold and jewels at your feet. 

But until you do that, <deleted>. There is widespread consensus about Climate Change among a huge coalition of credible scientists working in a range of different fields whose data all points to the same conclusion. 

4 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Is it? Any figures from 500 years ago? 

I can do better than that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_last_2,000_years

33 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Thats one guy. Show us the data from 1455 or 1233.

 

Is 1945 avg taken from how many sources?

 

How many sources in 2022 vs 1978?

 

Are the locations the same?

What are you talking about? My posts are about the fossil fuel industry hiring a PR 'genius' to change the narrative on climate change. None of them are scientists but they are all con-men.

1 hour ago, JCauto said:

Dude, you're welcome to join the discussion with those people (there are many) who are working in that aspect of Climate Science. I too work in related fields (forest conservation), but different ones than those. I have too much work to casually review the decades of effort in another field I haven't received specific training in. 

But understand that when I say "join the discussion", I mean do what you actually wrote. Do the research in a structured way and compile or source your data and publish your analysis in a credible publication (the bigger the better, but you'd want such groundbreaking stuff to get the widest distribution and receive the most criticism so you can be sure you've got it right). Then you'll be taken very seriously, and your research will be looked at with the aid of fine-toothed combs. Perhaps you're the One, the man who discovered the straw that broke the Climate Change back! You'd be applauded by all of your friends and the fossil fuel industry will lay gold and jewels at your feet. 

But until you do that, <deleted>. There is widespread consensus about Climate Change among a huge coalition of credible scientists working in a range of different fields whose data all points to the same conclusion. 

Google skeptics. Look at how many there are.

32 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

What are you talking about? My posts are about the fossil fuel industry hiring a PR 'genius' to change the narrative on climate change. None of them are scientists but they are all con-men.

So you believe those that sell alternatives dont use pr? 

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

I can do better than that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_last_2,000_years

So what was Patong in 1562 april 6th?

37 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

What are you talking about? My posts are about the fossil fuel industry hiring a PR 'genius' to change the narrative on climate change. None of them are scientists but they are all con-men.

Talking about science. Science is about data not pr. Show me the Thai data from 1932? 

How could we account for the medieval warm period?

Perhaps they had to give up their cars and vans

Then there is the puzzle of the mini ice age when

there were not enough cars and vans about.

7 hours ago, Photoguy21 said:

Net  Zero is ridiculous, it will never happen but why not get China and India to cut down? They are by far the largest contributors.

And the USA?

1 minute ago, George Aylesham said:

And the USA?

The country is irrelevant, you will not get now, next week or next century a zero footprint. CO2 is what plants feed off. Get down to zero CO2 and you could destroy a vast amount of vegetation.

Edited July 25, 20223 yr by Photoguy21

9 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

How could we account for the medieval warm period?

Perhaps they had to give up their cars and vans

Then there is the puzzle of the mini ice age when

there were not enough cars and vans about.

During the Medieval Warm Period, roughly from 800 to 1200 AD, temperatures rose a few degrees above average. That warming has been connected to improved crop yields in parts of Europe, and the temporary Viking occupation of Greenland. During the following Little Ice Age, which lasted roughly from 1300 to 1850, the Greenland Vikings disappeared, glaciers from California to the European Alps advanced, and New York harbor froze, enabling people to walk from Manhattan to New Jersey without benefit of the George Washington Bridge.

 

https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2019/07/24/climate-epochs-that-werent/

22 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

The country is irrelevant, you will not get now, next week or next century a zero footprint. CO2 is what plants feed off. Get down to zero CO2 and you could destroy a vast amount of vegetation.

Zero carbon footprint is achieving a balance between cutting the amount of Co2 produced and remaining emissions re-absorbed from the atmosphere by forest and oceans. 

As co2 is reduced there will be worldwide famine,

which seems to be the plan amongst our leaders.

Already farmland is disappearing, farmers paid to

destroy crops and grow weeds and trees.