mP:
Nobody knows the facts etc.
That's a convenient thing people say when they disagree with or don't understand the facts that are known by climate scientists worldwide. See cofty's chart above.
Recent Global Cooling Controversy
by metatron 236 Replies latest jw friends
-
Jeffro
-
mP
jgnat:
Sure i was overgeneralizing , but for example during ww2 when there were shortages, governments had to take drastic measures to help the war effort. If global warming of cooling or whatever was that big a problem, then surely one must expect equally big actions from gov.
-
mP
jeffro:
Nobody knows the facts etc.
That's a convenient thing people say when they disagree with or don't understand the facts that are known by climate scientists worldwide. See cofty's chart above.
MP:
You are right i should qualified my statement. By Nobody i was referring to the general public parrots. Most people in the public just dont know the facts.Where did cofty get that chart from ? I would be interested in reading the remaining material. Anyone can draw a chart and attach a title, not that im claiming cofty would, but it would be great to see what they said "exactly". Stuff like what the causes or problem is according to them.
-
mP
A bit like xians who claim scholars believe in jesus and everything said in the bible and then you find out they dont actually believe in the miracles or resurrection but that a man a preacher may have existed. Two quite different things.
-
besty
@mP
Where did cofty get that chart from ? I would be interested in reading the remaining material. Anyone can draw a chart and attach a title, not that im claiming cofty would, but it would be great to see what they said "exactly". Stuff like what the causes or problem is according to them.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article - original source survey
http://thecontributor.com/why-climate-deniers-have-no-scientific-credibility-one-pie-chart - survey author commentary on his paper
His summary:
"Scientists do not disagree about human-caused global warming. It is the ruling paradigm of climate science, in the same way that plate tectonics is the ruling paradigm of geology. We know that continents move. We know that the earth is warming and that human emissions of greenhouse gases are the primary cause. These are known facts about which virtually all publishing scientists agree."
Human caused global warming/climate change is as much a fact as gravity, evolution and the sun being the centre of the solar system. Any alternative view is anti-science and likely ideology-driven.
-
Jeffro
mP:
If global warming of cooling or whatever was that big a problem, then surely one must expect equally big actions from gov.
That seems fairly obvious. But governments benefit too much from multinational companies in the fossil-fuel business, and when some try, their efforts are made out to be unpopular or ineffectual. (Efforts to address climate change in Australia have been attacked by conservative politicians, the media and mining companies.) However, some governments are doing a lot about it. Germany produces more power from solar energy than Australia does, even though it's a much smaller area, and gets less sunlight throughout the year per area. And Sweden imports rubbish from other countries for use in clean energy production.
It is a very well established fact that although temperatures on Earth have been hotter in the past, the rate at which climate is changing is greater than at any time in the past as a result of manmade factors.
-
besty
@metatron
The field of climate prediction is undergoing a sort of self destruction - because of over confident predictions that turn sour in public view, as the BBC screen capture suggests
Did you read the full story at the BBC website, or did you rely on the Daily Fail bitesize screen capture?
The BBC article makes clear that the headline grabbing 2013 claim was an outlier and that most other Artic Ice forecasting teams were seeing 2030 and out being a more realistic timeline.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on the scientific integrity of the Daily Mail article as found at http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/09/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-delusions
-
mP
Jeffro:
(Efforts to address climate change in Australia have been attacked by conservative politicians, the media and mining companies.)
mP:
There have been almost no efforts, just taxes. They did try with the batts and solar panels initiatives but they are minor efforts. Climate change is a new way to lie to the public to increase taxation.
-
mP
Jeffro:
That seems fairly obvious. But governments benefit too much from multinational companies in the fossil-fuel business, and when some try, their efforts are made out to be unpopular or ineffectual.
mP:
the sad thing is they did more about cfc than they have done against climate change. Lots of new business opportunities occured after that, lots of people bought new fridges etc.
-
metatron
A Headline Is Still A Headline.
That's my point! As Tom Waits once said, "the large print giveth and the small print taketh away". If a climate speculation is nothing more than tenuous speculation, why do sources such as the BBC keep printing them ? ! Over the longer term, it damages credibility.
In addition, I am aware that fear-mongering claims about future hurricanes often came from politicians and foolish journalists but they still get published by the mass media.
The above is a strong reason why this climate concern has grown beyond its foundation of fact: The Too Big To Jail Banks want carbon trading markets that they can parasitically feed off of, as they do much else.
metatron