Quote
Stoneage

Quote
SomeGuy
"We can no longer save the planet by playing by the rules", says Greta.

Personally I find this Greta idolizing phenomenon quite scary. (And her parents should be reprimanded for child abuse of this poor girl.)

We get fear mongering, then the notion that anything should be allowed to avert the "catastrophe." Freedom, self determination, democracy and the ability to think for yourself are being sacrificed. That, in history, has never ended well before.

The one thing she says is "listen to the scientists". She wants politicians to act on the matter. Nothing else.
I'm more scared by your views than hers. You want status quo. Business as usual. As if that is going to solve anything.

I did not say that we should do nothing. What I'm saying is that I don't like this blind, irrational following of this 15 year old. The fact that there are other scientists' views as well is being swept under the carpet by her and by universities. For me, the most unscientific attitude you can have is to ignore other opinions and that's exactly what's going on in the academic world today: those other scientists are refused as speakers because they don't have the 'right opinion'. The same with mainstream media. Meanwhile there are lots of people who discovered the new climate religion and line their pockets with it, in all kinds of advisory capacities and shady expertologist bureaus and all. And to see someone's views here with topics like plastic soup and the like, mixed up with climate change, which has NOTHING to do with that subject at all, being lauded as intelligent... sorry, but no.

the impact on climate change of human activities (such as intensive farming and breeding) is questioned by 1 scientist to 99, the other are opinions politically biased to keep the status quo or worse. populism these days has loosen too much the difference between scientific studies and mere opinions.

having said that I also take with more than a grain of salt the cult of personalities as greta (but the opponents do the same with their leaders, dont they?) also I dont like the old slogans against capitalism per se that are coming back among some of the ecologists. solutions are more complex than slogans. but that does not turn a scientific evidence in a fake news.

fake is the notion that the earth has infinite resources for a global population growing so fast in just the last couple of centuries.

mick and keith (and ronnie) have decided to do something unusual and be explicit, either way you look at it, it is a small sign of the times.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 18:14 by maumau.

Quote
SomeGuy
And to see someone's views here with topics like plastic soup and the like, mixed up with climate change, which has NOTHING to do with that subject at all, being lauded as intelligent... sorry, but no.

What??

I assume you are talking about my post, in which case if you can show it to be a load of rubbish then please do so, but at least read it first and try to follow what I said.
The whole point of me writing it was that I get sick of people just calling things wrong without offering any valid reasons whatsoever. So come on buddy, tear my arguments apart ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 19:13 by JimmyShelter.

22-Sep-2019:

United Nations on climate change: 2014 to 2019 warmest period so far

"The signs and impacts of global heating are speeding up, the latest science on climate change, published ahead of key UN talks in New York, says. The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says the five-year period from 2014 to 2019 is the warmest on record. Sea-level rise has accelerated significantly over the same period, as CO2 emissions have hit new highs. The WMO says carbon-cutting efforts have to be intensified immediately."

Read more: [www.BBC.com] - (it's also on other news channels as well as in the press).

Which period? Since when? Comparedvto which periods? And why? Etc etc.

Quote
SomeGuy
I don't think that there are many people here who think that the climate isn't changing.

But interestingly there seem to be a few. To echo BV's point and expand, it is more likely that people of one particular political philosophy are 'climate change deniers' for some peculiar reason.

That's why it seems like a political issue, when really it doesn't have anything to do with politics at all.

Unfortunately, you need political choices to effect an outcome and right now we're not getting an outcome that is helpful.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Which period? Since when? Compared to which periods? And why? Etc etc.

Financial Times, 22-Sep-2019:

UN climate summit: leaders gather ahead of New York meeting

Multinationals pledge drastic cuts to emissions after biggest climate demonstrations ever

World leaders are gathering in New York ahead of Monday’s UN climate summit, when about 60 countries are expected to make new climate commitments. The biggest climate demonstrations ever took place on Friday in more than 150 countries, as multinationals also pledged to drastically cut emissions. This blog brings you the latest news from our reporters on an important week for environmental issues.

Reports warns on ‘tragic effect’ of record temperature

Scientists have issued a stark warning about the impact of rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, ahead of the UN climate summit in New York.

The 2015-2019 period has been the warmest five-year-period on record, and the rate of global sea level rise is also accelerating, according to a new report from the UN’s World Meteorological Association. While annual sea level rise was about 3mm per year during 1997-2006, this has sped up 5mm per year in the May 2014-summer 2019 period.

“Climate change causes and impacts are increasing rather than slowing down,” said Petteri Taalas, head of the WMO and co-chair of the science advisory group of the UN climate summit. “As we have seen this year with tragic effect in the Bahamas and Mozambique, sea level rise and intense tropical storms led to humanitarian and economic catastrophes,” he added.

Global emissions are rising and will not peak until after 2030, based on current country policies, putting the planet on course for 2.9C-3.4C of warming by the year 2100, the report warned.

As about 60 heads of state prepare to take to the stage at the UN climate summit on Monday with new climate announcements, the report — a synthesis of research from eight groups including the UN Environment Program and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — highlighted the most dramatic changes that have already taken place on the planet.

New data on greenhouse gases showed the growth rate for carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere was 20 per cent faster during 2015-2019 than during the previous five-year period, the result of rising emissions.

In the Arctic, multiyear sea ice that stays frozen from year to year is close to disappearing, the report warned, noting that the four lowest years on record for winter sea ice extent occurred during 2015-2019. The accelerating melt of the Greenland ice sheet and global glaciers, in addition to the thermal expansion of the ocean as it gets warmer, have all contributed to a speed-up in the rate of sea level rise.

Large group of multinationals sign UN climate pact

As world leaders began gathering in New York for Monday’s UN Climate Action Summit, a group of multinational companies including Swiss Re, Danone, Ikea, Salesforce and L’Oréal pledged to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions.

With the announcement of 59 new signatories, the UN Global Compact now has 87 companies, with a combined market cap of $2.3tn, on board with its campaign to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade. The initiative launched earlier this year with 28 companies signing up in July, including Levi Strauss, AstraZeneca and Unilever.

Companies signing on with the UNGC pledge have agreed to set independently verified “science-based” targets and create decarbonisation plans within 24 months to start bringing their emissions down to keep warming below 1.5C. Signatories also have the option to publicly commit to reaching net-zero emissions by no later than 2050.

More than 600 companies had already pledged to do their part in limiting global warming to 2C as set out in the 2016 Paris climate accord, but their progress on hitting those goals has been patchy. Only 15 per cent of the world’s largest 500 companies are on track.

Nonetheless, the rapidly rising number of companies taking action on climate change is evidence of a “massive intellectual revolution” in the world of business, said Andrew Steer, a board member at the Science Based Targets Initiative — a coalition between the UNGC and various environmental research and activist groups in charge of vetting the companies signing the pledge.

“Just five or 10 years ago, the vast majority of CEOs, boards and governments believed it would be nice to do something about climate change but it would require a trade off,” Mr Steer said. “Now, their view is that smart policies on climate change encourage more resource efficiency and [the development of] new technology . . . which can lead to more, rather than less, competitiveness.”

- Billy Nauman in New York

Source: [www.ft.com] .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 19:40 by Irix.

Quote
drewmaster
What have they done to the earth?
What have they done to our fair sister?
Ravaged and plundered and ripped her and bit her
Stuck her with knives in the side of the dawn
And tied her with fences and dragged her down

from
"When the Music's Over"
Written by Jim Morrison
Recorded by the Doors in 1967

This is prescient, having been written over 50 years ago.

[www.breitbart.com]

Quote
nick
[www.breitbart.com]

Hmm, what did treaclefingers just say:

Quote
treaclefingers
... it is more likely that people of one particular political philosophy are 'climate change deniers' for some peculiar reason.

How apt.

And that political philosophy shares more traits with a cult than with political philosophies in general.

Quote
nick
[www.breitbart.com]

Now that’s a fine neutral, objective and unbiased source

The source is merely calling your side out.

By climate change we do not mean, this summer was warmer or not, this has nothing to do with climate change. But what we can note, are the sudden temperature changes, even in summer, very violent and very frequent thunderstorms. But the overheating can be noticed by the ever-shrinking glaciers.

Yes but the IPCC on looks at human element not natural causes.

I would not trust anything published on Breitbart. Is that a serious indepentend news site like WSJ.com and NYTIMES.com? From what I am told it is a single sided propaganda site.

Bjornulf

Quote
nick
The source is merely calling your side out.

I think that tells us all we need to know - "your side"
This has become just another partisan battle to you hasn't it.

There is little point trying to be rational with you really.

The NYT has an agenda. This is how you guys play it. If it's differing from your point of view, it's propaganda, it's wrong, it's a lie, etc. Neither side will accomplish anything. Prop up Greta, pimp little kids out from school, it's all in vain. Mother Nature will do her thing regardless.

Descending into farce now ...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 21:13 by JimmyShelter.

Don't know which insult to use there jiminy?

Shut up Nick

Quote
JimmyShelter

Quote
nick
[www.breitbart.com]

Hmm, what did treaclefingers just say:

Quote
treaclefingers
... it is more likely that people of one particular political philosophy are 'climate change deniers' for some peculiar reason.

How apt.

And that political philosophy shares more traits with a cult than with political philosophies in general.

Funnily enough, an MP in the UK parliament called out the Tory Party (Conservatives = Money Chasers = US republicans) as a sect last week..............on tv too.........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 21:29 by EddieByword.

Quote
JimmyShelter
Shut up Nick

That's exactly what you guys want. So easily "triggered" when it not 100% your way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 21:34 by nick.

I made my point, no more time for this crap. I come here for Rolling Stones info.

Lately though it's a platform for It's NOT Only Rock n Roll.

What was your point then? Take a dump on the carpet and then get out asap because it's not really worth your time?

"YOU'RE ALL A BUNCH OF SLAVES!!" Jim Morrison, 1969. Jes sayin', no offense, I can quote my favourite singer, too.

Really, I agree that it's best to change things in industry, cattle and the lot. I just can't stand this slavishly following of what this professor or that weatherman (who earn their money on the side by giving talks about, guess what... climate change) on the telly said. Can anyone explain to me why in my country people have to get rid of gas stoves, central heating on gas etc, when a few miles across the border, the rest of Europe is GETTING GAS newly fitted in their houses because it's CLEANER energy?

So, I don't drive a car (I do everything by bicycle), don't have kids who would pollute the earth, I live in a tiny house, I have flown maybe three times in my entire life (unlike some others), I separate my garbage into five different categories. But I'm not a veggie, I give you that. I think that my footprint on this earth is rather modest compared to most of those loud people who demand OTHER PEOPLE to change their way of living. But I guess this discussion is not about personal behaviour.

Btw, the high commissioner of the UN human rights comittee is some Saudi royal, which is peculiar at best, knowing the record of his country on that issue. So, quoting the UN doesn't necessarily mean so much.

And finally, a few centuries ago only 1 in 99 scientists (only 1 PERIOD, in fact) had the audacity to put forward that the earth might not be the centre of the universe. Not to mention the fact that (according to some) there's just about 30,000 scientists who differ from this self proclaimed unanimity of opinion on climate change (but I wouldn't know if that number is correct). So, to say that it's 'scientific fact', and 'scientists agree' and phrases like that are meaningless, but only outline the sheer arrogance of those claims.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2019-09-22 22:01 by SomeGuy.

Quote
Nikkei
What was your point then? Take a dump on the carpet and then get out asap because it's not really worth your time?

At a Rolling Stones message board, exactly.

Well the sun continues to shine and the Earth keeps on renewing itself every year because it's a solar-powered machine. So is that machine spinning out of control or are there built-in negative feedback loops that stop it from spinning out of control that have evolved over millions of years? And have we sampled enough data to know if there are definitive trends or not?

Nobody answered my question about an RC time constant. It's a fundamental concept that is seen everywhere in Nature. A simple example is to imagine a kettle of warm water on your stove. The room is 20C and the water is 30C, a difference of 10C. How long does it take the water to cool to 13.7C? Let's say it takes 20 minutes.

But what if the kettle is not say 1/2 gallon capacity, but it's a 500 gallon capacity? In this case it might take several days for the water to cool to 13.7C.

But what if the kettle is the size of the Earth? What is the time constant for the Earth/atmosphere system? Is it 5 years? Is it ten years? I think it is much longer than 10 years and so I think that we simply don't have enough data. At the same time I am in favour of a rational approach to reducing our collective carbon footprint and switching over to renewable energy.

The real problem with many opinion polls is the choice "I don't know" is not given as a possible answer.

The real problem with many opinion polls is the choice "I don't know" is not given as a possible answer.

Exactly

Hardly anyone here is a scientist. To debate advanced scientific models unless you're a scholar yourself is useless. Going nowhere.