La Belle Verte (The Green Beautiful) on Vimeo
Sci-fi movie ?
The Jena Experiment - Why do ecosystems need biodiversity on Vimeo
Science can bring positive solutions
Natural poor land transformation method
Running out of Time | Documentary on Holistic Management
Sci-fi movie ?
The Jena Experiment - Why do ecosystems need biodiversity on Vimeo
Science can bring positive solutions
Natural poor land transformation method
Running out of Time | Documentary on Holistic Management
Here is a run down on 'Climategate' - the case where climate change deniers stole data off a server at a university and then misrepresented or took out of context the academic information and discussion in those emails.
Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia
(for @warrjon - please see the part where they discuss combining 'proxy' data with hard instrument measurements and the fact that this is done quite often in science to gain a wider overall picture of some parameter. Note also that this use of the data was made clear by the CRU researchers.)
Climatic Research Unit email controversy - Wikipedia
(for @warrjon - please see the part where they discuss combining 'proxy' data with hard instrument measurements and the fact that this is done quite often in science to gain a wider overall picture of some parameter. Note also that this use of the data was made clear by the CRU researchers.)
Last edited:
Not surprising. If you're so far with your head in the sand, a little theft and dishonesty doesn't make it much worse.
Who cares about facts and figures - my ego is on the line!
Jan
Who cares about facts and figures - my ego is on the line!
Jan
They are not the ones who said the debate is settled and avoiding it.
Lets take an example of Bybee Quantum Purifier, the one that claims to "reduce noise and improve the overall signal to produce better detail resolution and greater warmth and harmonic richness". Just buy and try it. BTW, the debate on what's inside is settled therefore no debates. That's no conspiracy, period?
Here is another no conspiracy.
I read them back when it happened. Not all of them, as there were a bunch, but enough of them to form an opinion of the people who were prominent in the field at the time.
And in this country, it was global warming, and when that failed to gain traction with the ordinary guy on the street, probably because in a lot of places, certainly where I am at, it was noticeably cooling off, it became climate change.
It probably hasn't helped much that breathless dire warnings have come and gone, that half wit celebrities lecture ordinary people while zipping around in biz jets, half wit media types wring their hands while talking down to ordinary folks about it, and the whole carbon credit thing just looks like a scam. And there are still a lot of people that remember the coming ice age thing of the late 70's.
My personal opinion is that name calling, drama, hypocrisy, and the outward appearance of stifling dissent are very poor means of persuading ordinary people, who are the ones that have to be brought on board if you want to really change things. But that seems to be the approach as best I can tell.
More TODD.
Climate science is young and I do indeed remember cold winters in the 70’s and indeed the big freeze in Chicago. But, that was 40 years ago and NASA, NOAA, IPCC, HDcrut data relentlessly shows temperatures rising and CO2 increasing in the ensuing period.
But according to you, it’s all a conspiracy and as Jan pointed out, thousands of scientists must be buying into this thing. There must be some seriously secret emails out there directing the whole operation. Who is doing this? The Illuminati who want to control everything maybe? The 666 society? The Club of Rome? CIA maybe? Is it the anti-Christ? Putin? The Chinese government? North Korea? Aliens?
Seriously, what is the aim of this whole conspiracy story when if governments wanted to control people more they could just pass laws to do it or tax them more etc etc. Many other, cheaper ways. How about a 15% levy on fossil fuels? If people riot, call the army out. The coffers will be full and the populace will comply. Job done.
Of course it’s none of this stuff. Temperatures are rising because humans are pumping 40 gigatons (2017 figure) a year into the atmosphere because of the insatiable desire for energy and a first world lifestyle.
(You still did not answer your question from a few pages ago: do you believe the moon landings were a hoax?)
Last edited:
Wrt the evidence for the change from 'global warming' to 'climate change', you presented some opinion like this:
It might be what you think but first of all the 'experts' did not change anything as they already assessed the _climate__change_ with the first IPCC report.
As you present it, you seem to believe as if the 'marketiers' (as you happen to call them before) would have switched to 'climate change' because 'global warming' did not happen, which is apparently a total distortion of the reality and of course neglects what is published in the peer reviewed journals.
If the said change did happen wrt the other groups I can't evaluate as you did not provide any hard evidence.
Right from the beginning global warming was reported as the cause and the climate change was reported as the associated effect.
So in which way does it matter if the alleged 'change' did happen?
It depends on the specific topic of a discussion if one term or the other is the more appropriate to use.
I'll do, if you are able to provide hard evidence for your claim(s).
You are right about celebrities, their private jets and alarmist science (the ‘oceans will boil away’ by 2050) but it does not change the picture that if we do not curb CO2 production, life will become increasingly difficult for humans and it will be exceedingly unpleasant in a +3 degree world (+-1.5 margin of error for the naysayers).
I don’t think stifling dissent is the issue. I see some pretty crazy anti-AGW stuff out there. For example, there’s a guy that writes books on alternative history and has a name for frequenting scholarly websites and challenging people on the conventional view of history. Some of his stuff is truly bizarre. He has taken up the anti-AGW cudgel and it’s all a conspiracy. Then there there are others that describe themselves as ‘Luke warmers’, acknowledge anthropogenic CO2 warming, don’t see the world ending in 2022 and do some serious science to back their views up. That facilitates debate and better science. Politicians and others saying it’s a conspiracy do not.
Your way of categorizing things: If it's something you disagree with or doesn't fit your belief.
When it was increasing, why the hype about coming ice age, which didn't come. That hype is what I've pointed out when mentioning conspiracy.
Only if it was that simple, especially the aftermath of it to those who ordered. With the digital communication technology already in the hands of the public, it will be much harder to get by than the authorities did with Tiananmen Square incident.
We've already debated on this earlier and your reply on the details was "I don’t know, but surmise..."
You mean I didn't answer your question? My answer to your moon landing question is no.
Ah, more of your same dance, different tune. 🙄
I presented quote and image.
I guess you didn't look at the global temperature chart since An Inconvenient Truth was released.
OK my dear friend.
“Your way of categorizing things: If it's something you disagree with or doesn't fit your belief.”
You could of course help your case by simply citing some well respected scientists who think AGW is a hoax or a conspiracy.
As I said a week or so ago, the issue here is there’s just too much of the ‘belief’ stuff and not enough focus on the numbers. You have yet to put any plausible case on the table that shows CO2 increases and global temperature increases are not linked, or that there is no temperature increase.
You could of course help your case by simply citing some well respected scientists who think AGW is a hoax or a conspiracy.
As I said a week or so ago, the issue here is there’s just too much of the ‘belief’ stuff and not enough focus on the numbers. You have yet to put any plausible case on the table that shows CO2 increases and global temperature increases are not linked, or that there is no temperature increase.
Last edited:
Are you serious? Have you forgotten my replies about "not in sync" between CO2 rise chart and global temperature roller coaster?
Btw, it seems the alleged 'hype' about 70's climate cooling (ice age is coming) was not for real:
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Peterson, Connolley and Fleck; The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
Some media articles were nevertheless spreading the idea, though.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
Peterson, Connolley and Fleck; The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
Some media articles were nevertheless spreading the idea, though.
Here’s the correct data Temperature data (HadCRUT4, CRUTEM4) Climatic Research Unit global temperature
Attachments
Last edited:
I'm not sure why people get hung up on cold winters and global warming. If the general trend is the plannet is warming, and this is causing large quantities of Ice to melt or break up in the Arctic or Antarctic, then it is reasonable to assume that large amounts of cold water are likely to start flowing. This extra cold water which flows in currents can then cause colder than normal winds to blow off the ocean over land.
As for changing the name from global warming, to Climate Change, I think that is simply because people don't really notice a difference of 0.5 to 1 degree, it's pretty subtle, but they do notice the more frequent floods, warm spells in winter, cold spells in summer, storms, and other weather phenomenon, that seem to be more extreme or different to past experience.
Pretty simple really.
Tony.
As for changing the name from global warming, to Climate Change, I think that is simply because people don't really notice a difference of 0.5 to 1 degree, it's pretty subtle, but they do notice the more frequent floods, warm spells in winter, cold spells in summer, storms, and other weather phenomenon, that seem to be more extreme or different to past experience.
Pretty simple really.
Tony.
Not so simple. The thermal equivalent of snowmelt Q needs to be determined from the heat balance equation.
“Your way of categorizing things: If it's something you disagree with or doesn't fit your belief.”
And if it doesn’t fit your beliefs no matter what the the facts you call it a conspiracy.
And if it doesn’t fit your beliefs no matter what the the facts you call it a conspiracy.
Saw footage of the ‘burning amazon’ this morning......sure seems to me like the local farmers are out of control, either accidentally or purposefully, or both?
Bob, I think the Conspiracy theory generators are already churning away - “film at 11:00”
Boldonaro has decided that some political theatre is in order - is his ego even more fragile than DJT and he needs the attention? Oh, right I forgot all autocrats share at least that trait - and is now sending on his StormTroopers to assist fighting the fires. And just ‘cause we’re such nice guys, Justin had committed to sending in some Canadian forces as well.
Honestly, I think if Ryan George tried to pitch this as a movie he’d be laffed outta the room.
Boldonaro has decided that some political theatre is in order - is his ego even more fragile than DJT and he needs the attention? Oh, right I forgot all autocrats share at least that trait - and is now sending on his StormTroopers to assist fighting the fires. And just ‘cause we’re such nice guys, Justin had committed to sending in some Canadian forces as well.
Honestly, I think if Ryan George tried to pitch this as a movie he’d be laffed outta the room.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.