Donate SIGN UP

There's No Pleasing Some!

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 08:12 Tue 31st Aug 2021 | News
57 Answers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58387017
Getting into bed with the weird beards hasn't impressed Greta!
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 57rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
There's a great read called 1215 written by Danny Danziger, exploring UK society back at the time of Magna Carta. I can't remember precisely the number but the climate was 1.5C warmer than 2003 and red wine was being grown as far north as Ely and white wine into Scotland, crops etc far higher up hill slopes as well. In fact, the drinks of choice were wine and mead,...
06:06 Wed 01st Sep 2021
Have you thought about asking the EDs if there's a vacancy for a "Scotland Correspondent"?
Please don’t .
Question Author
please don't what? I'm supporting Scotland! there really is no pleasing some!
Question Author
The UK is the no 2 climate responder, this Brat needs to start picking on the bad guys.
So true tora but it depends on her parents telling her what to say. They are probably anti capitalists like a lot of them are, who are using climate change as the ideal vehicle.
Whatever; climate change is natural. Having said that before on here, with my reasons, my answer was removed. I seem to be treated like a blasphemer. In Barnstaple a couple of weeks ago, there were two people with a sticker board, asking passers-by to place a sticker next to the question "Are you concerned about climate change?" Y or N. All of the stickers were in the Y column, except mine, which was in the N column. Blimey, these two erupted in howls of derision and disgust at me. I felt as the though the next step would be a trial for witchcraft. I just said that the main thing which drives the climate on this planet is the Sun, not cars, factories and aircraft. And I believe that, regardless of ER, GT, The Green Party or anyone else. Other than that, everything's fine thanks! :o)
We have long known that climate can change for natural reasons. But to assert that this implies that humans cannot also change the climate, is like saying that forest fires cannot be set by careless campers because lightning also causes forest fires. It is simply illogical. Climate change has multiple causes.”
Honestly, who really cares what this child has to say?

Good post 10C.
Yes I copied pasted it LCG -have you got a problem with that...? Good grief you really are obsessed aren't you lol!
From that posted article, the last line seems significant.
\\ Climate change has multiple causes.”//
If there are multiple causes, has anybody worked out what percentage of these causes are humans responsible for?
I've always believed that the Earth will do whatever it wants, and we are mere passengers. However, I think with all the pollution we have created, especially in the past 100 years, we are perhaps adding to the speeding up of processes (Global Warming in particular) that may have happened anyway, just in a different time-frame.
//If there are multiple causes, has anybody worked out what percentage of these causes are humans responsible for?//

No need. We've been told. As 10CS found out, suggesting something to the contrary is heresy. They'd burn him at the stake if it didn't produce so much "carbon".
VULCAN

"Humans emissions and activities have caused around 100% of the warming observed since 1950, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) fifth assessment report."

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-why-scientists-think-100-of-global-warming-is-due-to-humans
This passage sums up the strange arithmetic that is at work when we’re told we’re all going to burn to death:

“Similarly, the recent US fourth national climate assessment found that between 93% to 123% of observed 1951-2010 warming was due to human activities.
These conclusions have led to some confusion as to how more than 100% of observed warming could be attributable to human activity. A human contribution of greater than 100% is possible because natural climate change associated with volcanoes and solar activity would most likely have resulted in a slight cooling over the past 50 years, offsetting some of the warming associated with human activities.”

The explanation makes no sense. You might as well say that there would be much more CO2 in the atmosphere if plants did not photosynthesise it back into oxygen. Such is the strange world of “climatology”.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58130705
None of this is fact or truth then ?
Did anyone notice what happened in Europe over the summer ?
THECORBYLOON, the observations go back a mere seventy years, how can the scientists establish anything over such a short period compared with the age of the earth?
//Did anyone notice what happened in Europe over the summer ?//

Apparently they had some hot weather (not unknown in many parts of southern Europe). They had very little rain (also a common occurrence). Some fires were started (as they often are) and raged out of control because everything was very dry (as it usually is between June and August).

Did anything unusual happen?
Plainly, while it goes without saying that climate change can be natural, the overwhelming evidence is that this climate change is unnaturally rapid and the result of man made factors.
That’s also good news in a way as it means we can do something about it

1 to 20 of 57rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

There's No Pleasing Some!

Answer Question >>