Alfa Romeo Forum banner

Are we affecting the climate?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 15 31.3%
  • Yes but insignificantly.

    Votes: 17 35.4%
  • No

    Votes: 12 25.0%
  • other

    Votes: 4 8.3%

  • Total voters
    48
21 - 40 of 85 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,485 Posts
In the past, I found this site : http://www.climate-skeptic.com/skeptic_summaries/index.html a slightly interesting read. I'm not claiming that any or all of it is true (the domain name itself makes me doubt it) but still. I've not watched any of the videos on it, just read from 'Chapter 1...' onwards.

Like I say, I'm not making any claims about it's accuracy - all I'm saying is that it's an interesting counterpoint to the story we're always told. I don't take everything it says as gospel, any more than I take the BBC's man-made global warming evangelism as gospel.

As with everything, I expect the truth is somewhere in the middle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
The only problem with Wikipedia is that it can be changed by anyone, and the person who wrote the article is probably a strong climate change believer, and not a sceptic like many people.
I think wikipedia is BRILLIANT!!! Sure at any one time it can be hijacked, but in the end the facts always win.

If you really want a counter-argument, and it isn't posted on wikipedia already, it probably isn't plausible.

If you really want to deny the evidence posted there (and Fraser is right, that in academic circles there is a very broad concensus), then you are going to have to do some original research of your own.

We have been sleepwalking the planet into disaster, but it is reassuring to know that the reasoned arguments are winning, against the powerful vested interests, at last.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,786 Posts
This all reminds me of a recording of street corner interviews I did for British Gas in 1977. They thought that natural gas would last for 15 years.
The question was "What will you do when we run out of gas?"
About 90% said "Change to oil."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,872 Posts
Are we unable to comprehend the possibilty that, as in any democratic decision, the majority may be wrong :eek:

Or are you so hooked in to the infalibilty of scientists that you just can't allow yourselves to believe that is possible :eek:

So by saying that scientists virtually all agree (if that is true) you simply fall into the Lemming category. And now we find out that Lemmings don't actually commit suicide :rolleyes: even though the majority of scientists believed they did :rolleyes:
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Are we unable to comprehend the possibilty that, as in any democratic decision, the majority may be wrong :eek:

Or are you so hooked in to the infalibilty of scientists that you just can't allow yourselves to believe that is possible :eek:

So by saying that scientists virtually all agree (if that is true) you simply fall into the Lemming category. And now we find out that Lemmings don't actually commit suicide :rolleyes: even though the majority of scientists believed they did :rolleyes:

Are we unable to comprehence the possibility that we have looked into the research over many decades, and found the evidence to be so overwhelming that it is highly unlikely to be false?

Just because you agree with the majority on an issue doesn't make you a Lemming, as long as you are with the majority because you have looked into the research yourself.

And I stand by my earlier point, the stakes are so high, that to stand around doing nothing while we um and ah about who's to blame borders on the criminal.

We've reached a point where doing nothing isn't an option. If we work hard and find it was non essential, the situation slows naturally then that's fine. If we work hard and start to reverse the trend directly, then that's great. If we work hard and find we can't do anything to halt the change, then that's fine too, because at least we didn't sit on our backsides watching it happen without a fight.

I'm not a big fan of backside sitters :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,872 Posts
I am not a scientist. I have no means of checking whether the 'facts' presented to me by scientists are true or false. But I have been round long enough now to know that scientists have presented me with well researched facts before and they have since proved to be incorrect.

I do not advocate doing nothing.

I also do not advocate scare mongering.

Start at a much smaller level. Teach kids to eat everything on their plate and not chuck the bits they are bored with into the bin. Teach them to put their empty cans into a bin. Stop telling kids that the ice caps will melt and the world will flood. That's far too big a scenario and too remote from their personal experience. Win the small battles first. Not one single one of us can win the war but we can all make small contributions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
926 Posts
Trouble with all these "must save the earth" greenies is that they don't stick to facts,and massage scientific parameters to suit thier own ends.They have cried wolf so often now that people just don't take notice of them anymore.Whatever happened to Acid rain? Remember? It was going to destroy practically all plant life by the turn of the century (yes 7 years ago) Where is it now? These people twist facts and moan on about how we are destroying the world-its called evolution.Evolution is not something which happened thousands of years ago and then stopped-its still continueing today.We are getting bigger,the average man is now a couple of centimeters taller-evolutionThe grey squirrel is taking over from the red-only the strongest one will survive-evolution.There are no wooly mamoths or sabre tooth tigers left-evolution.The Earth probably is getting warmer,certainly our weather patterns seem to be changing,but haven't they always?We may be contributing to this in some way,but what started the cycle,why did the last ice age end and the world begin to warm up?Why did it begin and the world cooled down?It certainly wasn't burning fossil fuels that caused it.
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Trouble with all these "must save the earth" greenies is that they don't stick to facts,and massage scientific parameters to suit thier own ends.They have cried wolf so often now that people just don't take notice of them anymore.Whatever happened to Acid rain? Remember? It was going to destroy practically all plant life by the turn of the century (yes 7 years ago) Where is it now? These people twist facts and moan on about how we are destroying the world-its called evolution.Evolution is not something which happened thousands of years ago and then stopped-its still continueing today.We are getting bigger,the average man is now a couple of centimeters taller-evolutionThe grey squirrel is taking over from the red-only the strongest one will survive-evolution.There are no wooly mamoths or sabre tooth tigers left-evolution.The Earth probably is getting warmer,certainly our weather patterns seem to be changing,but haven't they always?We may be contributing to this in some way,but what started the cycle,why did the last ice age end and the world begin to warm up?Why did it begin and the world cooled down?It certainly wasn't burning fossil fuels that caused it.
So Acid rain is no longer a problem? :rolleyes:

Just because something disapears off the 6 o'clock news for a while doesn't mean it stops existing....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
114,698 Posts
I think it is happening, but it is part of a natural cycle. I do think that human activity may be speeding the process up though.
I tend to agree with you symon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,680 Posts
@ Gibbo and Alfa man - these are really quite strange viewpoints. What you have been told in the past you have been told by the Media, not science. The Media goes out of it's way to present scare stories and, in many cases, to denigrate science. Read the scientific literature and you will get a different storey that takes account of the maybes.

You could argue that the Climate Change debate is merely another example of the same thing. Except when you dig deep enough the literature backs the story in the vast majority of cases. To admit you don't understand something and then blindly question those who have studied an area of science since their teens is odd.

Alfa man - your examples of evolution are questionable - man is taller because of diet and healthcare; not evolution. The wooly mammoth and the sabre-toothed tiger may even be extinct because man hunted them to extinction. And man introduced the grey squirrel to the UK. The common thread? These are all examples of man-made influences. We have polluted watercourses, groundwater, land and air. We have poisoned many thousands in pollution incidents (Bhopal).We have been doing this for 200 years. So why couldn't there be a global impact after all this time?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
694 Posts
There is far too much deforestation going on, & the stuff that is re-planted, eg palm-oil trees is not good enough. My understanding is that as trees absorb CO2 & give out O2 this is not a good thing
There is also still far too much unnecessary packaging of products.

But, the IPCC initial report from 1995 was "sexed-up" by beaurocrats as it wasn't dramatic enough, & the scientists involved in writing it refused to sign the final version.
Also, James Hansens original predictions of global temperature rise in 1998, which was arguably the starting point of the global warming scare have proven to be inaccurate by 200%,(.35deg rise was predicted, but only .11degree rise. Hansen has since admitted that long term global temp rise is nor possible to model or predict.
Politicsized science is rarely a good idea.
Whole new industries & committees have been set up & funded as a result of the global warming theory, spending & costing billions.
When a failed USA presidential candidate makes millions of $ by flying around the world in his own jet preaching the eco-message, I'm a bit suspicious.
Having said that, even though I am sceptical of the message, I go along with large parts of the eco way of life. We recycle most of our household waste, use low energy light bulbs etc etc. OK, the Brera isn't that eco-friendly, but politicians preaching the message, whilst being driven around in big limo's & flying round the world for conferences, smacks of hypocrisy, & just another chance to raise taxes.
Matt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,872 Posts
Fraser, I would just like the volume turned down on catastrophe theories and a concentration on the small things that we can all do and will, long term, make a huge difference.

If we concentrate, or have our concentration directed for us, onto huge theories of global disaster and they subsequently prove incorrect then the whole shebang is discredited.

And I am cynical enough to think that this could happen. Sorry Fraser but I don't share your faith in 'facts' :D Cos facts change. Nor do I subscribe to the view that due to an area of my education not covering the subject in hand I can't still hold an opinion contrary to the experts. And, shock horror, I might be right :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,301 Posts
Just a thought
what caused the first ice age?
What caused the great floods, even including NOAH`S,
When was the first ,Great famine?
Then again I started out as a full blown luddite,
I`m some what diluted now, cannot take it all in , what with cows, etc, creating m/gas etc, I some times think the boffin know more than they care to tell the mass, but I do feel that Mother nature has ,and will continue to run her own course.
John the ludite.:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
683 Posts
Climate change or not, it's a convenient excuse for taxation. Where does the congestion charge go? Road tax? Fuel Duty likewise? Climate change is happening, like it always has. We can try leave a better place for our decendents to live in, but I'm not sure you can enforce more environmental awareness by just taxing everyone to death.

Having said that, I think the UK is a lot more environmentally aware than some countries I've been to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,680 Posts
Gibbo, the point is we can all do small things that will make a difference overall. As for the disaster theories, they may be right or they may be wildly over-conservative, but if they are right and humanity can make a difference could you look your grandchildren or great grandchildren in the eye and say "I ignored the threat because it was too big an invenience to do otherwise"?

I also agree that of course you have the right to question science, just do a bit of research and question it from a knowlegable viewpoint.

Also, facts, by their very definition, do not change. When the facts start to stack up against a theory then the theory changes. That is the nature of science. The change in the modelled predictions in temperature change, for instance, will allow the climatologists to refine the models further - maybe (hopefully) they will show that it's all been a storm in a teacup. In the meantime the consequences are potentially so severe that there is a need to press for changes in our habits and demands.

Whether taxation is the right answer is maybe for another debate, but it is used a a stick to discourage high energy demands.

At Luddite, just because there have been natural disasters doesn't mean there can't be man-made ones. Besides, the last Ice Age wasn't Global, and floods and famines are local disasters (unless you believe the Old Testament) caused by normal (if infrequent) weather events.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,872 Posts
I don't feel in any way inconvenienced Fraser. I think that the global disaster arguement is so very very big, true or not, that it is way too much for most people to take on board and is, therefore, being ignored and dismissed. People can understand smaller ideas and will respond to those.

I think you know that I agree with your general ideas. I just think it would be better to shift the whole concentration onto the things that people will do something about.

More people give up smoking due to realising they can no longer afford it financially, a small consideration, rather than it threatening their very existance, a huge consideration. I did :D

It's a matter of scale and if people are doing the small things, which they can understand and relate to, the bigger issue will be taking care of itself but you won't need to try to scare the sh1te out of people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,301 Posts
Hi, Frazer, I take your point,Though I do fear that the logic ,of off setting a tree so I can travel,somewhat confusing, If the tree is aready there, It can only absorb a given amount of carbon,And when the number crunchers state that the cost of personal energy saving is lost on the expediture,of said savings on other things,
new cars holidays etc, Though I do a great deal of recycling.Ijust hope that the nations do not fall out on who`s saving what?
John the ludite.:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,710 Posts
I think its a fact - clearly we are having a significant effect on the climate - however, I also believe that there is a natural cycle at work too.
 
21 - 40 of 85 Posts
Top