are there still any climate sceptics out there??? It's only 5mins...

[EDOldie]

So, if the world decides to fart of it's own volition we are all pretty stuffed?

[Huguenot]

Well not so much of its own volition, but because we raised the average temperature by just enough to break the seal, as it were.

As HAL9000 points out, we have very little idea of what that tipping point is. Because it was under permafrost noone really noticed it was there until it started bubbling out - in tandem with unprecedented ice reductions across the arctic.

[katie1997]

We are in an interglacial period of Earth's history;it could get very cold again...

www.snowballearth.org

[vinceayre]

The Met Office has now admitted to BBC News that its annual global mean forecast predicted temperatures higher than actual temperatures for nine years out of the last 10.

The govenment has asked the Met Office not to recheck its historical data in case it gives the climate sceptics a reason to doubt even more. The Met office are now checking historical data which will take two years to finish, I would not be surprised if it shows that climate change is not such an immediate threat as previously thought. This is in conjunction with the statement put forward by the UN that the Hymilayan?? Glaciers are not going to melt by 2035 as previously stated as a fact but was in fact based on a five minute telephone conversation with an Indian Professor.

I think climate change is becoming so Political and financially motivated now that there can be no dissent or it will all come tumbling down. It is in too many people interest for it to be true and any question of it being wrong cannot and will not be tolerated. Once you cant question something without being labled a fool I feel obliged to believe the opposite.

[Timster]

this is interesting. Vince - what's the source for the government asking the met office not to re-check historical data?

[Huguenot]

There are yet monkeys who will spend hours poring over a pullover for a loose thread, and having teased one out will declare it proves the pullover doesn't exist.

The calculation was one in 3,000 pages, and didn't appear in the summary for policymakers.

"The glacier will reduce in length by over 80% due to man made warming..."

"Yeah, but it hasn't gone though has it"

"Well it may be gone by 2035"

"Prove it"

"Well I can't guarantee it'll be completely gone"

"Well it hasn't gone then has it? Therefore I'm not bothered"

"Over 80%?????"

"But I hasn't gone though has it."

Thus are idiots defined.

[silverfox]

Posted by: Huguenot Today, 10:02AM

"There are yet monkeys who will spend hours poring over a pullover for a loose thread, and having teased one out will declare it proves the pullover doesn't exist... Thus are idiots defined."

Curious analogy Huguenot because this describes Climate Change arguments quite well.

If the monkey pulls the thread to unravel the pullover then the pullover will no longer exist. It beomes a length of wool/cotton.

So, is the monkey really mankind unravelling our fragile ecosystem or is the monkey unravelling a number of preassembled parts that have been stitched together to form a whole belief system?

[Huguenot]

That only works in cartoons Silverfox.

If you pull a thread out of a jumper you'll have a short thread and a jumper. Try it.

Not sure where you're going with the ecosystem thing. What people don't grasp is the idea of the straw that breaks the camel's back. Climate sceptics are arguing that the straw isn't very heavy, and that the scales aren't properly calibrated. Pointless.

The whole ecosystem is a very delicately poised environment that happens to benefit our current state of humankind. If we change it by a very tiny amount, the planet won't be bothered, but it'll no longer be good for humankind as we know it.

Pepole who don't care are either old enough to think they'll die before it happens, or rich and daft enough to think they can buy their way out of it.

[Timster]

vinceayre Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Once you cant question something

> without being labled a fool I feel obliged to

> believe the opposite.

So, you believe the earth is flat and smoking doesn't cause cancer?

[silverfox]

This thread reminds me of the idea that if you put enough monkeys in a room with typewriters and give them enough time one of them will write the complete works of Shakespeare.

Climate change doom mongers are a bit like those monkeys and one day they might come up with solutions that could possibly make a difference - that is if they haven't died of peptic ulcers worrying about things they've got no control over.

As I've stated before here and on other threads, if you think we're heading for trouble now, wait until China, India and South America really get going. Those billions of industrious peasants all want what you've got Huguenot and Timster: labour saving white goods, fancy HD tellies, 3G phones and state of the art laptops/tablets. Energy hungry cities of 30 million people or more will be the norm.

It'll take a bit more than windmills, silly light bulbs and putting gas masks on burping sheep to address the problems this will throw up.

Any suggestions?

[SeanMacGabhann]

silverfox - is your argument

a) there IS nothing to worry about or is it

b) there is BUT there is nothing we can do because other countries will mess it up big time

[silverfox]

My point is things are going to get much worse in terms of demands on resources and some things we take for granted on this planet will diminish and/or vanish - there's very little we can do about it in the short term.

We will adapt and the solutions will lie in scientific and technological advances, nanotechnology and genetic modifications of foods and livestock.

What climate change scientists need to do is identify which of the myriad contributing factors are the most important issues that need to be tackled first.

[SeanMacGabhann]

surely as rational beings we can manage the change rather than wait until it's too late and/or hope tech is up to speed?

Even if we buy ourselves comparatively little time, that might be enough to make a difference?

And by doing things which appear insignificant, collectively it concentrates the minds of governments/tech companies - their voters and consumers are demanding action. And I think this is what has happened - but now that governments are acting in our interests they are under fire from some quarters for making the issue "political" (whatever that means in this context)

[Huguenot]

I think you've made a great point Silverfox.

Science, tech, nanotech, food tech can all take place - assuming that we have the motivation, focus and the investment.

What the lightbulbs and farty-sheep stories are about is focus and motivation. Keeping it close to home, as it were.

The investment bit comes out of our pockets, and that means it needs to by elevated up the priority list. Pointing out the threat is a good way of doing that.

I can't make up my mind whether you're in despair (which is sad), or don't give a feck (which is bad), or don't recognise cause and effect in social activity (which is mad). ;-)

BTW, there was just a whiff of 'running from the evil inscrutable asians' in your tone which is misdirected. You've done it before. come out and stay for a while and you'll realise they're just like you :)

[HAL9000]

silverfox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We will adapt and the solutions will lie in

> scientific and technological advances,

> nanotechnology ...

'Nanotechnology' (as defined by Feynman/Taniguchi or Drexler) has failed to produce anything of any consequence after over 50 and 25 years of research, respectively.

> ... and genetic modifications of foods and livestock.

As far as food plants are concerned, the 'green revolution' has pushed the GM envelope to the limit: the amount of solar energy that can illuminate a given area of photosynthesising foliage. Sorry - no free lunch here.

Unless you think cucumber flavoured sardines or glow-in-the-dark jellyfish will save the world, best not to hold your breath ? those technologies aren?t going anywhere.

[mockney piers]

I'm reminded of Swift suddenly for some reason.

[SteveT]

I'm reminded of swallows..........

[mockney piers]

James Swallow the 2000AD and sometime Doctor Who and Star Trek bit novels author?

Pray tell?

I was of course referring to the Grand Academy of Lagardo in Laputa and getting the sunbeams out of cucumbers.

I would have thought that reference would have been like a rallying call to the sceptics and denialists no?

[HAL9000]

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lagardo

It's Lagado.

> I would have thought that reference would have

> been like a rallying call to the sceptics and

> denialists no?

I was half-tempted to refer to 'glow-in-the-dark cucumbers' but decided not to open the door for anyone inclined to lower the thread's tone :)

[mockney piers]

Goodness knows the tone is low enough elsewhere, lets leave the drawing room as sacred ground ;-)

[silverfox]

Osama bin Laden enters global warming debate

Demonstrating a surprising concern for the environment, Bin Laden voiced his dismay at recent international efforts to tackle global warming.

"Discussing climate change is not an intellectual luxury, but a reality," he said. "All of the industrialised countries, especially the big ones, bear responsibility for the global warming crisis."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7104143/Osama-bin-Laden-enters-global-warming-debate.html

[vinceayre]

According to one of the head ex boffin's at UEA there has been no statistical increase in temperature since 1995 and the medieval warm period may not have been localised to just the northern hemisphere but global meaning a sharp rise in temperature has been seen before where industrial pollution could not have been blamed.

Maybe the sceptics may well have the last laugh as the "humans have caused climate change" brigade start to realise they have been conned.

[????]

And of course we will all have our last laugh if the "ex-Boffin" is proven wrong.

[Huguenot]

Once again, I feel my asperger compulsion to respond to Vince's insightful observation.

*Tired sigh*

Yes Vince, we had climate change in the past. Ice Ages and everything.

If you want, you can have a climate change now too. This one affecting 7 billion people. The earth won't be at all bothered.

There are two ways your front room can get hot. One way is the sun shining through the window, the other way is setting fire to it.

At the moment mankind is sparking matches and dropping them on the curtains. Silly willy sceptics are arguing that you can't prove that matches are the only thing that causes a fire.

Fat wallies blaming their metabolism whilst wolfing the last bag in a Walker's multipack spring to mind.

[vinceayre]

I am just saying that the same scientists that have been telling us the we are all going to die unless we pay more tax, which is effectively the outcome of the climate change lobbyists, are now telling us that it has not got hotter in 15 years and that the global warming we are experiencing now may well have happened without our help before, which is what the sceptics have said all along.

You have been conned but you cant accept it because it would make you look foolish.