Is Keir Starmer Really Going To Arrest...
News2 mins ago
What's The Antidote To Greta.......?
64 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Spicerack
Attenborough is a grown man and can spout any drivel he likes.
_____________________
You mean just like you?
He has a wealth of experience, scientific evidence and knowledge behind him, none of it in dispute, his warnings have gravitas. Greta is echoing his words.
I'll take his findungs over yours!
Attenborough is a grown man and can spout any drivel he likes.
_____________________
You mean just like you?
He has a wealth of experience, scientific evidence and knowledge behind him, none of it in dispute, his warnings have gravitas. Greta is echoing his words.
I'll take his findungs over yours!
Spicerack:
https:/
Looking forward to your counter arguments to that link.
https:/
Looking forward to your counter arguments to that link.
I rarely comment on anything environmental - simply because, unlike, apparently, so many on this site, I just simply do not understand the science.
So I have literally no idea whether Thunberg talks sense or not, what I do know though is that she is one bloody irritating kid. She's more irritating than the fat swamp donkey Gemma Collins, and I thought that was impossible.
So I have literally no idea whether Thunberg talks sense or not, what I do know though is that she is one bloody irritating kid. She's more irritating than the fat swamp donkey Gemma Collins, and I thought that was impossible.
//Nobody 'hates' Greta. We object to an autistic child being exploited.//
Sorry Spicy, you may speak for yourself here, but I've seen plenty of people, some on here, who have verbally abused, ridiculed and insulted Greta, with a venomthat wouldn't have been out of place at a Westboro Baptist Church picket line.
Among rational people, I expect you're correct, but the world is chock full of irrational morons.
Sorry Spicy, you may speak for yourself here, but I've seen plenty of people, some on here, who have verbally abused, ridiculed and insulted Greta, with a venomthat wouldn't have been out of place at a Westboro Baptist Church picket line.
Among rational people, I expect you're correct, but the world is chock full of irrational morons.
NJ 17.26 were you have the idea from that government is trying to control the planet is beyond me. They are trying to control the population who are destroying the planet. Very different.
Spice 18.31 Greta is not being exploited far from it, trust me, she's got a lot more up top than you think or will ever know, she knows how to conduct herself, and far from being an hysterical teenager as per NJ post early on. As for the march in Bristol along with many other school kids who had a day off from school,( that seemed to also upset many on here,) is that not what adults have been doing for years, marching, demonstrating, striking, for a worthy cause.?
I have an autistic grand daughter she's 7 years old and very very clever.
Spice 18.31 Greta is not being exploited far from it, trust me, she's got a lot more up top than you think or will ever know, she knows how to conduct herself, and far from being an hysterical teenager as per NJ post early on. As for the march in Bristol along with many other school kids who had a day off from school,( that seemed to also upset many on here,) is that not what adults have been doing for years, marching, demonstrating, striking, for a worthy cause.?
I have an autistic grand daughter she's 7 years old and very very clever.
//NJ 17.26 were you have the idea from that government is trying to control the planet is beyond me. They are trying to control the population who are destroying the planet. Very different.//
I didn't say they were attempting to control the planet. They aim to control the climate. They aim to keep global temperature increases to within (last time I looked) two degrees or whatever. And they might as well pish in the wind.
I didn't say they were attempting to control the planet. They aim to control the climate. They aim to keep global temperature increases to within (last time I looked) two degrees or whatever. And they might as well pish in the wind.
"Climategate" has been vastly exaggerated.
I said before on another thread that, in any other field of science, the apparent discrepancies, changes to modelling, new numbers, etc, would be seen as progress. Climate Science is perhaps unique in being so susceptible to political interpretation, and that has apparently given licence to its being used and abused appallingly by people who simply don't have the faintest experience in how to separate truth from fiction, "good" science from "bad" (here, I stress, I mean the methodology, rather than the conclusions -- it is clearly possible ab initio for "good science" to reach many different 'answers').
Take, for example, 10CS's point that the Sun is the only influence on the planet's climate. This is simply wrong: the Sun is clearly a major influence on our climate, there's no doubt about that, but what also matters is the atmosphere and its contents. Compare the climates of Venus and Earth, for example: unsurprisingly, Venus is hotter, but that higher temperature is down far more to the different atmospheres than it is to the distance to the Sun*. Likewise, Mars is far colder than you'd expect from its distance to the Sun, relative to Earth at least.
Or, to be even more obvious, compare the Climates of Earth and the Moon. On its own that destroys any suggestion that the atmosphere and what makes it up is somehow irrelevant, and it's clear that anyone who suggests that the Sun is the *only* influence has never really thought about the problem beyond what's needed to sound authoritative and dogmatic.
The Sun, then, is far from the only contributor, even though it's obviously important. What makes up the atmosphere matters too, in quantifiable ways. In particular, the greenhouse effect is uncontroversial; the fact that human activity is increasing greenhouse gas concentrations is also uncontroversial; and the fact that a change in the latter may affect the former is also pretty clear, even if the response is highly non-linear in ways we still have yet to understand.
Long story short: predictions about the future path of Climate Change are always subject to corrections and updates, and sadly those have been given way more attention than they deserved -- but the conclusion that human activity is having, and will continue to have, a measurable influence on the planet's climate is a very simply chain of common-sense links, now supported by incredibly robust science. Only those who have a transparent political motive can seriously argue against it, and the number of those is rapidly, and mercifully, diminishing.
I said before on another thread that, in any other field of science, the apparent discrepancies, changes to modelling, new numbers, etc, would be seen as progress. Climate Science is perhaps unique in being so susceptible to political interpretation, and that has apparently given licence to its being used and abused appallingly by people who simply don't have the faintest experience in how to separate truth from fiction, "good" science from "bad" (here, I stress, I mean the methodology, rather than the conclusions -- it is clearly possible ab initio for "good science" to reach many different 'answers').
Take, for example, 10CS's point that the Sun is the only influence on the planet's climate. This is simply wrong: the Sun is clearly a major influence on our climate, there's no doubt about that, but what also matters is the atmosphere and its contents. Compare the climates of Venus and Earth, for example: unsurprisingly, Venus is hotter, but that higher temperature is down far more to the different atmospheres than it is to the distance to the Sun*. Likewise, Mars is far colder than you'd expect from its distance to the Sun, relative to Earth at least.
Or, to be even more obvious, compare the Climates of Earth and the Moon. On its own that destroys any suggestion that the atmosphere and what makes it up is somehow irrelevant, and it's clear that anyone who suggests that the Sun is the *only* influence has never really thought about the problem beyond what's needed to sound authoritative and dogmatic.
The Sun, then, is far from the only contributor, even though it's obviously important. What makes up the atmosphere matters too, in quantifiable ways. In particular, the greenhouse effect is uncontroversial; the fact that human activity is increasing greenhouse gas concentrations is also uncontroversial; and the fact that a change in the latter may affect the former is also pretty clear, even if the response is highly non-linear in ways we still have yet to understand.
Long story short: predictions about the future path of Climate Change are always subject to corrections and updates, and sadly those have been given way more attention than they deserved -- but the conclusion that human activity is having, and will continue to have, a measurable influence on the planet's climate is a very simply chain of common-sense links, now supported by incredibly robust science. Only those who have a transparent political motive can seriously argue against it, and the number of those is rapidly, and mercifully, diminishing.
OK, so they're trying to control the behaviour of the population in order to control temperature increase. Same difference and my point remains: they're pishing in the wind. Even if the population does everything they say (or even if they did everything that Ms Thurnberg wants them to do - if only she'd let us know what that might be) it would make no difference.
// The point is we are using up oxygen faster than the planet can produce it ... //
This is actually true, although...
//... it is inevitable this will affect the climate ... //
Not any time soon. The dominant contribution to the present epoch of Climate Change is an increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gas levels.
This is actually true, although...
//... it is inevitable this will affect the climate ... //
Not any time soon. The dominant contribution to the present epoch of Climate Change is an increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gas levels.
There's no shortage of oxygen. Levels are, however, decreasing (very slighty!) at the moment.
https:/
https:/
To be honest, it would be more of a surprise if oxygen levels were constant.
https:/
https:/
To be honest, it would be more of a surprise if oxygen levels were constant.
//To be honest, it would be more of a surprise if oxygen levels were constant.//
Of course it would. It would also be a surprise if greenhouse gas levels were constant. It would also be a surprise if the climate and global temperatures were constant. But back to Oxygen, the statement earlier simply declaring that the "problem" (presumably that of Climate Change) is that we are using Oxygen faster than we can replenish it simply demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of what the cause of the alleged problem really is.
Of course it would. It would also be a surprise if greenhouse gas levels were constant. It would also be a surprise if the climate and global temperatures were constant. But back to Oxygen, the statement earlier simply declaring that the "problem" (presumably that of Climate Change) is that we are using Oxygen faster than we can replenish it simply demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of what the cause of the alleged problem really is.
// It would also be a surprise if greenhouse gas levels were constant. //
That's true, although the link between burning fossil fuels at a huge rate and rising CO2 levels is not exactly difficult to establish. In addition, some greenhouse gases such as CFCs are entirely artificial, with no natural sources whatever.
I agree that the comment about oxygen was bizarre, though.
That's true, although the link between burning fossil fuels at a huge rate and rising CO2 levels is not exactly difficult to establish. In addition, some greenhouse gases such as CFCs are entirely artificial, with no natural sources whatever.
I agree that the comment about oxygen was bizarre, though.
Latest Posts
News4 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Recession Risk As Britain Reels From...
News6 mins ago
It Will Never Make It To Strictly
ChatterBank8 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.