Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Climate Emergency
Comments
-
Absolutely agree and to be clear the comment you quoted was absolutely not aimed at youswordfish said:
I have no doubts on the science of causation of warming, Co2 level rises however caused, but many when it comes to our ability to bring those levels down, even though our actions have contributed to pushing them up. Co2 emissions did dip during COVID, when flights were grounded, but concentrations in the atmosphere continued to rise.cantersaddick said:Brain of a blancmange on show again.
That said, although we've not been able to reduce those levels by anything done so far (they've continued to rise regardless) whilst there's a possibility that we can, then we should continue trying imo.1 -
Chippy. I doubt anyone is going to disagree with Blackpools post. The fact is. If population growth is a factor in increasing co2 emissions which are warming the climate then it’s also a man driven factor.Chippycafc said:
Great post mate.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Its been the same for years mate as you know. Its now the same little troupe on a few threads. Some must have brains like medicine balls such is their great depth of so called knowledge (ie google).
Dare anyone see things in a different way particularly based on their own life experience out come the usual insults as demonstrated on this page alone.1 -
Where did I post killing and sterilising people is the answer.cantersaddick said:
Firstly - I said the idea that the only solution to climate change is to actively reduce the population is Eco-Fascism. Which it is. Using the environement as a reason to advocate for active population reduction policies (i.e. killing or sterilising people) is facism. No question. And that was only said in the conext of a conversation about "extreme green" ideas.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Again nuance can exist - its possible to say that a rising population has contributed to climate change (thats true) and also say that the most extreme solutions to that are awful and facist. Two things can be true at once. Don't try and make yourself the victim here.
On your wider point - there is no doubt that rising population has contributed to climate change in that more people will need more space and resource so therefore there will be less trees and wildspaces and more emissions. That is true. However when you dig into it a little deeper you see that:
-The richest 1% (77 million people) were responsible for 15.9% of global CO₂ emissions in 2019. The bottom 50% ( 3.9 billion people with average incomes of around $2,000 a year) accounted for just 7.7%https://www.oxfamamerica.org/press/richest-1-use-their-entire-annual-carbon-limit-in-just-10-days/
-The richest 1% now emit 75.1 tonnes of CO₂ per person per year. The 1.5°C-compatible annual budget per person is 2.1 tonnes. The richest 1% burn through their entire annual share in 10 days.https://www.sharing4good.org/article/richest-1-have-blown-through-their-fair-share-carbon-emissions-2026-just-10-days-says-oxfam
-By 2030, the emissions of the richest 1% are projected to be 22 times greater than the level compatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-emit-much-planet-heating-pollution-two-thirds-humanity
-A single hour on a large private jet emits roughly two tonnes of CO₂ — approaching the average person's entire annual footprint. Two hours can exceed it entirely. https://jettly.com/post/private-jet-emissions
-Those who fly private regularly can produce almost 500 times more carbon in a year than the average person worldwide. The most prolific private fliers produced 2,400 tonnes of CO₂ in the air in 2023 alone. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/private-jet-flights-climate-change
Private aviation contributed at least 15.6 million tonnes of CO₂ in 2023 — nearly 3.6 tonnes per flight — and almost half of all private flights were shorter than 500km. Trips that could have been driven. Or not taken. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01775-z
- Superyachts travelled an average of 12,465 nautical miles a year, producing an average annual carbon footprint of 5,672 tonnes each. It would take the average person 860 years to emit the same amount.https://www.oxfam.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-oxfam/the-environmental-impact-of-superyacht-and-private-jet-emissions/
- The carbon footprint accumulated from less than a week's use of a super-rich European's jets and yachts matches the entire lifetime carbon footprint of someone in the world's poorest 1%.https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/superyachts-and-jets-europes-elite-emit-more-carbon-pollution-week-worlds-poorest-1Lifestyle emissions are almost a distraction from the bigger number. The average investment emissions of the world's 50 richest billionaires are around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined. Nearly 40% of billionaire investments analysed are in highly polluting industries: oil, mining, shipping, and cement. Each billionaire carries, on average, an investment portfolio in companies that will produce 1.9 million tonnes of CO₂ annually, further locking the world into climate breakdown.
Its far too simplistic to see the correlation of population growth and just blame it without digging any deeper.
So the problem becomes much less one of population size and much more one of distribution of use of resources. In the world we produce 3 times the amount of food needed each year and yet there are people starving, we have more than enough housing for everyone an yet people are homeless or living in poverty. The problem is a distribution one not a too many people one. Its exactly the same with emissions, there are enough resources for every person on the planet to live a great life without desroying the planet.
The people least responsible for climate change are those most exposed to its consequences: floods, droughts, crop failure, displacement. The people most responsible are the ones with the political influence to block the solutions. Blaming a subsistence farmer in Bangladesh for climate change while a billionaire's yacht sits idling in Monaco burning 860 years of that farmer's carbon budget isn't analysis. It's misdirection.
Even if it was solely an issue of population size what solution are you advocating for?
Also globabl population is predicted to peak and then fall quite quickly in the next couple of years - in fact latest data is suggesting it may be happening sooner than it was predicted. That problem (if you believe it to be one) is self correcting already.
I didn't.
As for the rest of your post it's just a long boring read.
I stand by what I believe in.
An ever increasing world population is a major factor in climate change.
How we go about slowing it i don't know.
Education i guess.8 -
Best post I've ever read on here, couldn't have described the fraud that is cantersaddick any better.Redskin said:
Give it a rest, you jumped up little arriviste prick.cantersaddick said:
fixedShootersHillGuru said:
Please read a science book.TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Shooters hill I've read many books thank you, again you put people in a category of thick or stupid because they disagree with you. Many factors contribute to warming and cooling of the planet maybe you should read instead of watching a block of ice fall from a glacier and then running around your living room crying the world will end. You waffle on about science how's the scientist Anthony Fauci getting on? Was he right and trustworthy? Look forward to your response.
4 -
Logan’s Run might have the answer. 😬swordfish said:
Nothing controversial in that!blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Humans create the demand for Earth's resources and are the reason industries exist.
More people = greater demand = rising emissions.0 -
Absolute rubbish you're a fraud like most of you. "I only eat meat 3 times a week" and you say I post drivel.sam3110 said:
And where have I said as long as it suits me? I carbon offset my flights and hotels, I take trips abroad few and far between otherwise and use public transport unless absolutely necessary to use a car, and then it's a hybrid. I sign up to renewable source energy plans, I eat meat 3 times a week and veggie other than that and recycle as much as possible.TD_Addick said:
Do you actually read my posts? Let me slow it down for you, daily yes daily temperatures did not begin until the 1700s. Periods before that have been documented yes but in different ways.sam3110 said:
By this reasoning we'd have to assume that Henry VIII was swanning about in constant 35° heat in this get up, and somehow not dying immediately?TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Also, what about the ice age, if we apparently didn't know the temperature before 1770, is that all bollocks as well?See you on the holidays thread wizzing off all over the gaff like your buddy’s. Again the worst type moan and cry about the world warming but it’s ok as long as it suits you right?
I tend not to fully read your posts no, because my brain cannot comprehend that amount of drivel in one go1 -
I didnt say that you did.blackpool72 said:
Where did I post killing and sterilising people is the answer.cantersaddick said:
Firstly - I said the idea that the only solution to climate change is to actively reduce the population is Eco-Fascism. Which it is. Using the environement as a reason to advocate for active population reduction policies (i.e. killing or sterilising people) is facism. No question. And that was only said in the conext of a conversation about "extreme green" ideas.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Again nuance can exist - its possible to say that a rising population has contributed to climate change (thats true) and also say that the most extreme solutions to that are awful and facist. Two things can be true at once. Don't try and make yourself the victim here.
On your wider point - there is no doubt that rising population has contributed to climate change in that more people will need more space and resource so therefore there will be less trees and wildspaces and more emissions. That is true. However when you dig into it a little deeper you see that:
-The richest 1% (77 million people) were responsible for 15.9% of global CO₂ emissions in 2019. The bottom 50% ( 3.9 billion people with average incomes of around $2,000 a year) accounted for just 7.7%https://www.oxfamamerica.org/press/richest-1-use-their-entire-annual-carbon-limit-in-just-10-days/
-The richest 1% now emit 75.1 tonnes of CO₂ per person per year. The 1.5°C-compatible annual budget per person is 2.1 tonnes. The richest 1% burn through their entire annual share in 10 days.https://www.sharing4good.org/article/richest-1-have-blown-through-their-fair-share-carbon-emissions-2026-just-10-days-says-oxfam
-By 2030, the emissions of the richest 1% are projected to be 22 times greater than the level compatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-emit-much-planet-heating-pollution-two-thirds-humanity
-A single hour on a large private jet emits roughly two tonnes of CO₂ — approaching the average person's entire annual footprint. Two hours can exceed it entirely. https://jettly.com/post/private-jet-emissions
-Those who fly private regularly can produce almost 500 times more carbon in a year than the average person worldwide. The most prolific private fliers produced 2,400 tonnes of CO₂ in the air in 2023 alone. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/private-jet-flights-climate-change
Private aviation contributed at least 15.6 million tonnes of CO₂ in 2023 — nearly 3.6 tonnes per flight — and almost half of all private flights were shorter than 500km. Trips that could have been driven. Or not taken. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01775-z
- Superyachts travelled an average of 12,465 nautical miles a year, producing an average annual carbon footprint of 5,672 tonnes each. It would take the average person 860 years to emit the same amount.https://www.oxfam.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-oxfam/the-environmental-impact-of-superyacht-and-private-jet-emissions/
- The carbon footprint accumulated from less than a week's use of a super-rich European's jets and yachts matches the entire lifetime carbon footprint of someone in the world's poorest 1%.https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/superyachts-and-jets-europes-elite-emit-more-carbon-pollution-week-worlds-poorest-1Lifestyle emissions are almost a distraction from the bigger number. The average investment emissions of the world's 50 richest billionaires are around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined. Nearly 40% of billionaire investments analysed are in highly polluting industries: oil, mining, shipping, and cement. Each billionaire carries, on average, an investment portfolio in companies that will produce 1.9 million tonnes of CO₂ annually, further locking the world into climate breakdown.
Its far too simplistic to see the correlation of population growth and just blame it without digging any deeper.
So the problem becomes much less one of population size and much more one of distribution of use of resources. In the world we produce 3 times the amount of food needed each year and yet there are people starving, we have more than enough housing for everyone an yet people are homeless or living in poverty. The problem is a distribution one not a too many people one. Its exactly the same with emissions, there are enough resources for every person on the planet to live a great life without desroying the planet.
The people least responsible for climate change are those most exposed to its consequences: floods, droughts, crop failure, displacement. The people most responsible are the ones with the political influence to block the solutions. Blaming a subsistence farmer in Bangladesh for climate change while a billionaire's yacht sits idling in Monaco burning 860 years of that farmer's carbon budget isn't analysis. It's misdirection.
Even if it was solely an issue of population size what solution are you advocating for?
Also globabl population is predicted to peak and then fall quite quickly in the next couple of years - in fact latest data is suggesting it may be happening sooner than it was predicted. That problem (if you believe it to be one) is self correcting already.
I didn't.
As for the rest of your post it's just a long boring read.
I stand by what I believe in.
An ever increasing world population is a major factor in climate change.
How we go about slowing it i don't know.
Education i guess.
You said "A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists."
I pointed out that it isnt what was said. no one said blaming a rise in population was neo-facist. but someone (me) did say that if anyone (no one on here that ive seen but some in the world) take that idea and use it to justify extreme policies like killing or sterilisation then that would be Facist. There is an important distinction. No one was shutting down your opinion. It was an entirely sperate conversation about hypothetical "extreme green" ideas.
You can believe what you want. As I said I agree with you that population is clearly a factor. The place where we differ is that I think the distribution of the use of resources and emissions across that population is the real problem. And the evidence backs this up.
The population appears to be peaking very shortly and then is predicted to fall quite quickly. Social programmes and aid programmes to developing countries will speed this up as will access to basic education globally, particularly basic education for women.
A larger impact solution would be to tackle the distribution of use of resources.3 -
Continuing to piss off the right people. Excellent.TD_Addick said:
Best post I've ever read on here, couldn't have described the fraud that is cantersaddick any better.Redskin said:
Give it a rest, you jumped up little arriviste prick.cantersaddick said:
fixedShootersHillGuru said:
Please read a science book.TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Shooters hill I've read many books thank you, again you put people in a category of thick or stupid because they disagree with you. Many factors contribute to warming and cooling of the planet maybe you should read instead of watching a block of ice fall from a glacier and then running around your living room crying the world will end. You waffle on about science how's the scientist Anthony Fauci getting on? Was he right and trustworthy? Look forward to your response.
Glad to know I am taking up lots of space in your tiny mind.
A song often sung by the covered end comes to mind "In your head, in your head".1 -
What do we reckon folks? Phychic or a stalker?TD_Addick said:
Absolute rubbish you're a fraud like most of you. "I only eat meat 3 times a week" and you say I post drivel.sam3110 said:
And where have I said as long as it suits me? I carbon offset my flights and hotels, I take trips abroad few and far between otherwise and use public transport unless absolutely necessary to use a car, and then it's a hybrid. I sign up to renewable source energy plans, I eat meat 3 times a week and veggie other than that and recycle as much as possible.TD_Addick said:
Do you actually read my posts? Let me slow it down for you, daily yes daily temperatures did not begin until the 1700s. Periods before that have been documented yes but in different ways.sam3110 said:
By this reasoning we'd have to assume that Henry VIII was swanning about in constant 35° heat in this get up, and somehow not dying immediately?TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Also, what about the ice age, if we apparently didn't know the temperature before 1770, is that all bollocks as well?See you on the holidays thread wizzing off all over the gaff like your buddy’s. Again the worst type moan and cry about the world warming but it’s ok as long as it suits you right?
I tend not to fully read your posts no, because my brain cannot comprehend that amount of drivel in one go
I'm going for stalker. Gives off 4 or 5 restraining order vibes.
Edit: Having said that he is the sort of person who would believe in Tarot cards and all that because he "did his own research".0 -
El Niño.
Natural not man made I believe.
The climate is changing but not sure man can do a lot about natural phenomena.Socialism (the left if you like) ideologically believes in control of the individual. The exaggeration of man’s impact gives socialists political justification for further control. Any dissension from the ‘left consensus’ results in patronising condesesion, abuse of sources that are not The Guardian, BBC or other approved ‘left’ media outlets.In other words anything to stifle debate.
This thread and others on here illustrate that.
Dons tin hat.9 -
Sponsored links:
-
Ignoring your complete misunderstanding of socialism which is just untrue. But thats not for this forum.LenGlover said:El Niño.
Natural not man made I believe.
The climate is changing but not sure man can do a lot about natural phenomena.Socialism (the left if you like) ideologically believes in control of the individual. The exaggeration of man’s impact gives socialists political justification for further control. Any dissension from the ‘left consensus’ results in patronising condesesion, abuse of sources that are not The Guardian, BBC or other approved ‘left’ media outlets.In other words anything to stifle debate.
This thread and others on here illustrate that.
Dons tin hat.
El Nino cycles have always happened yes. This one which is being termed a super El Nino has been supercharged and intensified by massively higher ocean surface temperatures in the Pacific.
Again two things can be true. it can be true that these cycles have always existed and also true that climate change is worsening them and making them more extreme and wide reaching.
https://ncas.ac.uk/el-nino-explained-global-weather-uk-impacts-and-climate-change/
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/super-el-nino-extreme-weather-climate10 -
The increase in global population has coincided with a rapid increase in climate change. There can be no ambiguity about that. More people equals more greenhouse gas emissions equals greater climate change.
This, therefore, is another factor proving that climate change is both real and man-made.
The greatest increase in population comes from the areas with the lowest carbon emissions. Which means that, even with the current population, those living in the greater areas of carbon emissions need to do more. If we all emitted carbon at the rate of those that emit the least, then the global carbon emissions would be lower. Virtuous circle.
Yes population increase exacerbates climate change. But it proves, clearly, that we - the countries of the "Global North" and the "Western Hemisphere" - need to do considerably more.
Pointing fingers isn't going to lower temperatures.8 -
Population rise of course has plenty to do with Climate Change, it's humans that are causing the climate change, by the burning of fossil fuels and intensive animal farming.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
The more humans there are, the greater the effect on the planet. Humans have badly damaged the environment and the natural world as well. There are fewer trees that aid cooling and nature has been decimated, the UK being one of the worst, as it's one of the most nature depleted countries in the world.6 -
How's that going for you?Addick_and_Chips said:I don't want to start a political debate on here as we all know how that goes.....
But is anyone else concerned that we are into our 5th heatwave of the year, which will lead to further food and water shortages?
I care deeply for the environment and have been worried for years about where we are heading. I find it staggering that it's not being discussed more in the media at the moment.2 -
Err they did mate...they said the population is self correcting and past its peak. once again another decent posters thoughtful and true opinion is dismissed by the usual know alls..ShootersHillGuru said:
Chippy. I doubt anyone is going to disagree with Blackpools post. The fact is. If population growth is a factor in increasing co2 emissions which are warming the climate then it’s also a man driven factor.Chippycafc said:
Great post mate.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Its been the same for years mate as you know. Its now the same little troupe on a few threads. Some must have brains like medicine balls such is their great depth of so called knowledge (ie google).
Dare anyone see things in a different way particularly based on their own life experience out come the usual insults as demonstrated on this page alone.
I suppose we wont see Redman again who posted some intelligent and great views.2 -
Not really. I put people in a category of thick or stupid not for disagreeing with me but with disagreeing with science.TD_Addick said:
Best post I've ever read on here, couldn't have described the fraud that is cantersaddick any better.Redskin said:
Give it a rest, you jumped up little arriviste prick.cantersaddick said:
fixedShootersHillGuru said:
Please read a science book.TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Shooters hill I've read many books thank you, again you put people in a category of thick or stupid because they disagree with you. Many factors contribute to warming and cooling of the planet maybe you should read instead of watching a block of ice fall from a glacier and then running around your living room crying the world will end. You waffle on about science how's the scientist Anthony Fauci getting on? Was he right and trustworthy? Look forward to your response.I actually think your comments about Dr. Fauci explain quite a lot. As has been already written by others, Fauci is a respected in his own field as a scientist but because that science goes against Trumps administrative agenda he’s suddenly a villain.Question for you TD_Addick. Who would you rather have in charge of the health of the USA. Fauci or RFK Jnr ?3 -
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂TD_Addick said:
Absolute rubbish you're a fraud like most of you. "I only eat meat 3 times a week" and you say I post drivel.sam3110 said:
And where have I said as long as it suits me? I carbon offset my flights and hotels, I take trips abroad few and far between otherwise and use public transport unless absolutely necessary to use a car, and then it's a hybrid. I sign up to renewable source energy plans, I eat meat 3 times a week and veggie other than that and recycle as much as possible.TD_Addick said:
Do you actually read my posts? Let me slow it down for you, daily yes daily temperatures did not begin until the 1700s. Periods before that have been documented yes but in different ways.sam3110 said:
By this reasoning we'd have to assume that Henry VIII was swanning about in constant 35° heat in this get up, and somehow not dying immediately?TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Also, what about the ice age, if we apparently didn't know the temperature before 1770, is that all bollocks as well?See you on the holidays thread wizzing off all over the gaff like your buddy’s. Again the worst type moan and cry about the world warming but it’s ok as long as it suits you right?
I tend not to fully read your posts no, because my brain cannot comprehend that amount of drivel in one go0 -
As you agree with Blackpool's claim that climate change is real and that the big increase in population is to blame, What is it that you think humans are doing that causes climate change?Chippycafc said:
Great post mate.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Its been the same for years mate as you know. Its now the same little troupe on a few threads. Some must have brains like medicine balls such is their great depth of so called knowledge (ie google).
Dare anyone see things in a different way particularly based on their own life experience out come the usual insults as demonstrated on this page alone.
2 -
😂LenGlover said:El Niño.
Natural not man made I believe.
The climate is changing but not sure man can do a lot about natural phenomena.Socialism (the left if you like) ideologically believes in control of the individual. The exaggeration of man’s impact gives socialists political justification for further control. Any dissension from the ‘left consensus’ results in patronising condesesion, abuse of sources that are not The Guardian, BBC or other approved ‘left’ media outlets.In other words anything to stifle debate.
This thread and others on here illustrate that.
Dons tin hat.0 -
100% bang on mate.LenGlover said:El Niño.
Natural not man made I believe.
The climate is changing but not sure man can do a lot about natural phenomena.Socialism (the left if you like) ideologically believes in control of the individual. The exaggeration of man’s impact gives socialists political justification for further control. Any dissension from the ‘left consensus’ results in patronising condesesion, abuse of sources that are not The Guardian, BBC or other approved ‘left’ media outlets.In other words anything to stifle debate.
This thread and others on here illustrate that.
Dons tin hat.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
No no. I agreed with him that the increase in population is a factor. I did not disagree with that point. Do try and keep up.Chippycafc said:
Err they did mate...they said the population is self correcting and past its peak. once again another decent posters thoughtful and true opinion is dismissed by the usual know alls..ShootersHillGuru said:
Chippy. I doubt anyone is going to disagree with Blackpools post. The fact is. If population growth is a factor in increasing co2 emissions which are warming the climate then it’s also a man driven factor.Chippycafc said:
Great post mate.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Its been the same for years mate as you know. Its now the same little troupe on a few threads. Some must have brains like medicine balls such is their great depth of so called knowledge (ie google).
Dare anyone see things in a different way particularly based on their own life experience out come the usual insults as demonstrated on this page alone.
I suppose we wont see Redman again who posted some intelligent and great views.
Pointing out that population projections all show the globabl population is soon to be past its peak isnt disagreeing that it was a factor but pointing out it might not continue to be one going forwards. Latest data show that predictions made as recent as last year were estimating the peak too far into the future and it is constantly being revised to nearer and nearer future and a lower and lower peak. Climate change is likely an impact on this as it displaces populations and disrupts lives in the global south.
0 -
CO2 emissions and global population are both increasing.
But, CO2 emissions are fast outpacing population growth. And the main areas of population growth are in low-emission countries. The rate of population growth is declining. The rate of global temperature increases isn't.
Population growth is, therefore, a small contributory factor in climate change.5 -
You've mention Dr Fauci again, I gave you the reason why he is being discredited by the most authoritarian regime ever to have power in the USA.TD_Addick said:
Best post I've ever read on here, couldn't have described the fraud that is cantersaddick any better.Redskin said:
Give it a rest, you jumped up little arriviste prick.cantersaddick said:
fixedShootersHillGuru said:
Please read a science book.TD_Addick said:
Daily records began in 1770 not sure how you know about the last 12,000 years.cantersaddick said:
Ding ding ding ding! That's a full house on the climate denier spurious arguments!!TD_Addick said:
Maybe the planet is warming but it also did in the medieval warming period for a few hundred years and that was caused by many factors not burning fossil fuels. If you think weather/climate is just a straight line then you're wrong. It changes and has changed throughout history for many different reasons.bobmunro said:jimmymelrose said:TD_Addick said:
Thinking differently does not necessarily mean thinking straight.
Lol how pathetic honestly, because me and Chippy said something similar its suspicious, great work Sherlock you've cracked the case. Maybe we both share the same viewpoint that the Climate Change enthusiasts are nothing but aggressive angry people who throw insults at people for people thinking differently. I've been called every name under the sun for saying it's hot outside because it's the summer (shocking isn't it hot in the summer you wouldn't think that).Chizz said:
It's good to have different viewpoints on a thread like this. Everyone comes at this subject from their own perspective and/or armed with evidence from the worlds of science, government and business. It's a great sharing of knowledge.
In fact, no two posters share exactly the same thought process and deliver their messages in identical styles. Because, if two people did, that would look very suspicious indeed.Chippycafc said:
People are entitled to their opinions its called a forum.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.
Perhaps you can list what we shall talk about and which side of the fence to sit on. And your contribution on any thread 90% of the time is always to abuse others.TD_Addick said:
It's called discussion mate, what people do on forums.You're entitled to your opinions and people are allowed to think differently if you don't like don't read the thread simple as that, should be easy to figure out for someone with superior intelligence like yourself. Good Lord.Leroy Ambrose said:Why do you all fall for it? Every time? Every single fucking time?
Good Lord.How about: ' Shit, it’s 45 degrees outside, the trees are burning, we have to evacuate, but it’s summer’Try saying that to the people around Bordeaux. If it hasn’t sunk in yet, it will as it moves northwards and if you’ve got another 50 years to live.100%Nobody is using the argument that one hot summer or an extended few weeks of high temperatures is cast iron proof of global warming/climate change. But maybe there is evidence with 200 plus years of exponentially accelerating average global temperature, a similar accelerating rise in average ocean temperatures, and the melting of the ice caps - i.e.Earth's polar ice sheets and caps are losing massive amounts of mass rather than completely disappearing. Greenland loses about 266 billion tons of ice per year and Antarctica loses roughly 135 billion tons per year. Meanwhile, Arctic September sea ice area has halved since satellite records began in 1979We can discuss and argue about the causes and whether or not we have time and the ability to do something about it, but denying the earth is warming is just idiocy.
The MWP saw global temperatures rise only around 0.2 to 0.4°C above previous centuries, and the warming was largely concentrated in the North Atlantic — Europe and Greenland — not the entire globe. Climate proxy records show peak warmth occurred at different times in different regions, confirming it was not a globally uniform event.Now compare that to today. The top eleven hottest years ever recorded have all occurred in the last eleven years. For the first time in recorded history, the annual global average temperature exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. That's not a regional quirk. That's the whole planet. If you look separately at the summer temperature changes for the Northern and Southern hemispheres you'll see that warming actually exceeds 3.5°C its just that winters are getting more extreme in places too.
https://www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/2024-global-and-us-review
https://sigmaearth.com/medieval-warm-period-vs-modern-global-warming/
And the climate had been stable for 12,000 years before the last 150years with movements of less than half a degree above or below the mean (so a total 1 degree variation window).
Shooters hill I've read many books thank you, again you put people in a category of thick or stupid because they disagree with you. Many factors contribute to warming and cooling of the planet maybe you should read instead of watching a block of ice fall from a glacier and then running around your living room crying the world will end. You waffle on about science how's the scientist Anthony Fauci getting on? Was he right and trustworthy? Look forward to your response.
It isn't just Dr Fauci that is being discredited, it is scientific organisations all over the USA. Trump and his regime, including the worst possible person to be Health Secretary, are shutting down as many organisations that will question what they are doing.
A proposed 412‑page federal rule would give political appointees the power to decide which scientific projects receive funding and to terminate grants “at any time, for any reason,” replacing traditional peer review. This is a major shift away from expert-led evaluation.
The same rule would ban collaboration with foreign researchers, even in fields like particle physics where breakthroughs (e.g., the Higgs boson) require decades-long global cooperation. Scientists warn this would push the U.S. out of major discoveries.
The proposal would stop federal funding for publishing research, reducing transparency and making taxpayer-funded science harder for the public and other scientists to access.
We should all be very worried about this.10 -
Bless you lot for trying but why do you bother? It’s the same few people every time and they have proven again and again that they are anti-evidence. You can present them with all the facts and figures and disprove whatever false theory they’ve latched onto and they will ignore it entirely or shift the goalposts to talk about cars or China or, bizarrely, Covid again just to remind you they do this on every topic. I get correcting the record initially but save yourselves the effort you’re going to here, you may as well be debating a bowl of soup.18
-
I think the effects of the extreme weather we have experienced this year needs to be a wake-up call for everyone. It isn't 'just summer' as many deniers like to say, this is not normal, but is very likely to become the norm from now on.
Yesterday a community in Stourhead was decimated by wildfire. The tv pictures of fire spreading to homes by jumping some and missing out others, is something we've come to expect from the countries that already suffer from wildfires, not in the UK. The local Fire & Rescue service said that they have never experienced anything like it before.
Nature reserves with some of the rarest species have been decimated, with the effects to last for many years. Some species may not survive.
Whilst we don't know the reason for the train crash near Lewes yesterday, we do know that when the ground dries out it moves, causing pipes to crack, hence more water leaks and possibly ground to move under train tracks. It undermines the foundations of buildings and can cause subsidence.
The NHS at a time of year that you would expect to have fewer demands than in the winter, is experiencing some of the busiest days ever. Nurses are reporting to be passing out from the heat, because they work in old buildings with small poorly ventilated rooms. The emergency services are having their busiest time ever. SECAMB reported over 2000 extra calls out in just a couple of months. Deaths from heat related conditions rise in hot weather.
The cost of all of this is massive, estimated so far to have cost £5 billion. We will all have to pay more to make the UK fit to cope with the problems that extreme weather bring.
There is absolutely no doubt that we are in a climate emergency.
3 -
blackpool72 said:
Where did I post killing and sterilising people is the answer.cantersaddick said:
Firstly - I said the idea that the only solution to climate change is to actively reduce the population is Eco-Fascism. Which it is. Using the environement as a reason to advocate for active population reduction policies (i.e. killing or sterilising people) is facism. No question. And that was only said in the conext of a conversation about "extreme green" ideas.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Again nuance can exist - its possible to say that a rising population has contributed to climate change (thats true) and also say that the most extreme solutions to that are awful and facist. Two things can be true at once. Don't try and make yourself the victim here.
On your wider point - there is no doubt that rising population has contributed to climate change in that more people will need more space and resource so therefore there will be less trees and wildspaces and more emissions. That is true. However when you dig into it a little deeper you see that:
-The richest 1% (77 million people) were responsible for 15.9% of global CO₂ emissions in 2019. The bottom 50% ( 3.9 billion people with average incomes of around $2,000 a year) accounted for just 7.7%https://www.oxfamamerica.org/press/richest-1-use-their-entire-annual-carbon-limit-in-just-10-days/
-The richest 1% now emit 75.1 tonnes of CO₂ per person per year. The 1.5°C-compatible annual budget per person is 2.1 tonnes. The richest 1% burn through their entire annual share in 10 days.https://www.sharing4good.org/article/richest-1-have-blown-through-their-fair-share-carbon-emissions-2026-just-10-days-says-oxfam
-By 2030, the emissions of the richest 1% are projected to be 22 times greater than the level compatible with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/richest-1-emit-much-planet-heating-pollution-two-thirds-humanity
-A single hour on a large private jet emits roughly two tonnes of CO₂ — approaching the average person's entire annual footprint. Two hours can exceed it entirely. https://jettly.com/post/private-jet-emissions
-Those who fly private regularly can produce almost 500 times more carbon in a year than the average person worldwide. The most prolific private fliers produced 2,400 tonnes of CO₂ in the air in 2023 alone. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/private-jet-flights-climate-change
Private aviation contributed at least 15.6 million tonnes of CO₂ in 2023 — nearly 3.6 tonnes per flight — and almost half of all private flights were shorter than 500km. Trips that could have been driven. Or not taken. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01775-z
- Superyachts travelled an average of 12,465 nautical miles a year, producing an average annual carbon footprint of 5,672 tonnes each. It would take the average person 860 years to emit the same amount.https://www.oxfam.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-oxfam/the-environmental-impact-of-superyacht-and-private-jet-emissions/
- The carbon footprint accumulated from less than a week's use of a super-rich European's jets and yachts matches the entire lifetime carbon footprint of someone in the world's poorest 1%.https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/superyachts-and-jets-europes-elite-emit-more-carbon-pollution-week-worlds-poorest-1Lifestyle emissions are almost a distraction from the bigger number. The average investment emissions of the world's 50 richest billionaires are around 340 times their emissions from private jets and superyachts combined. Nearly 40% of billionaire investments analysed are in highly polluting industries: oil, mining, shipping, and cement. Each billionaire carries, on average, an investment portfolio in companies that will produce 1.9 million tonnes of CO₂ annually, further locking the world into climate breakdown.
Its far too simplistic to see the correlation of population growth and just blame it without digging any deeper.
So the problem becomes much less one of population size and much more one of distribution of use of resources. In the world we produce 3 times the amount of food needed each year and yet there are people starving, we have more than enough housing for everyone an yet people are homeless or living in poverty. The problem is a distribution one not a too many people one. Its exactly the same with emissions, there are enough resources for every person on the planet to live a great life without desroying the planet.
The people least responsible for climate change are those most exposed to its consequences: floods, droughts, crop failure, displacement. The people most responsible are the ones with the political influence to block the solutions. Blaming a subsistence farmer in Bangladesh for climate change while a billionaire's yacht sits idling in Monaco burning 860 years of that farmer's carbon budget isn't analysis. It's misdirection.
Even if it was solely an issue of population size what solution are you advocating for?
Also globabl population is predicted to peak and then fall quite quickly in the next couple of years - in fact latest data is suggesting it may be happening sooner than it was predicted. That problem (if you believe it to be one) is self correcting already.
I didn't.
As for the rest of your post it's just a long boring read.
I stand by what I believe in.
An ever increasing world population is a major factor in climate change.
How we go about slowing it i don't know.
Education i guess.100% agree - and I said as much in an earlier post. You at least accept that the climate is changing, as do I and most reasonable people, and also the overwhelming body of the scientists. The earth is warming at an alarming rate and there are likely to be many reasons why that is the case. Can we stop it? I don't know, but the answer is probably not.The kick back on here is to the people who claim that climate change/global warming isn't happening and that it is a hoax. Which is, and I repeat what I said before, idiocy.5 -
Or Blancmange!Garrymanilow said:Bless you lot for trying but why do you bother? It’s the same few people every time and they have proven again and again that they are anti-evidence. You can present them with all the facts and figures and disprove whatever false theory they’ve latched onto and they will ignore it entirely or shift the goalposts to talk about cars or China or, bizarrely, Covid again just to remind you they do this on every topic. I get correcting the record initially but save yourselves the effort you’re going to here, you may as well be debating a bowl of soup.
I enjoy it, keeps me sharp, refuting bad faith arguments keeps my knowledge up to date.
3 -
Here's a challenge then, rather than offering baseless opinions and having people guess what you're referring to, try posting some evidence to back up your claim. Show us the research that fairly and accurately challenges the scientific consensus on climate change that is conducted by real scientists, working for respected scientific organisations, that is well designed, well executed and isn't paid for by bad actors.Redskin said:
Oh dear...Stig said:
Oh yeah, I forgot, someone who did their 'own research' on Facebook discovered a small localised climate blip in the medieval period which completely trashes everything.Redskin said:
No it isn't.ME14addick said:
Sadly yes, it makes me angry that science and scientists are seen as easy targets for deniers and conspiracy theorists.swordfish said:
Yes, but our science teachers were probably lying to us when they taught us about the properties of the various gasses that comprise the Earth's atmosphere. Facts don't matter these days. The truth is whatever you want it to be.ME14addick said:
They do, cattle produce Methane, which is another greenhouse gas, slightly higher amounts in the atmosphere than CO2, but not as long lasting.TD_Addick said:
Climate-sceptic loon? Climate change fear mongers think cow farts warm the planet, you sound like the loon.Chizz said:
Great picture sequence of yesterday's eclipse. Shared only to upset the climate-sceptic loons who will be apoplectic at the bottom right image.
The science on climate change is unequivocal, yet deniers would rather believe those paid to spread mis/disinformation.
I made no mention of what you've clumsily alluded to in your post.Do you know the meaning of 'unequivocal'?
ME14 claimed that 'The Science on climate change is unequivocal' which is simply untrue.
Address the issue rather than spewing up some clichéd doggerel that has no relation to what I posted.
I've always enjoyed your contributions on CL, Stig, I have a different opinion to you, that's all.11 -
If it makes just one person re-evaluate their thinking it will be worth it, hopefully there are others who haven't posted, but have come to understand how Climate Change is being effected.Garrymanilow said:Bless you lot for trying but why do you bother? It’s the same few people every time and they have proven again and again that they are anti-evidence. You can present them with all the facts and figures and disprove whatever false theory they’ve latched onto and they will ignore it entirely or shift the goalposts to talk about cars or China or, bizarrely, Covid again just to remind you they do this on every topic. I get correcting the record initially but save yourselves the effort you’re going to here, you may as well be debating a bowl of soup.
1 -
Think its fairly obvious. The more people there are the more our natural resources are going to be consumed. The movement of those over populated areas and the fact that some nations dont understand birth control is further added to that. As we are havng to provide food, energy to our over populated planet then obviously areas have to made free to house wll thesepeole.ME14addick said:
As you agree with Blackpool's claim that climate change is real and that the big increase in population is to blame, What is it that you think humans are doing that causes climate change?Chippycafc said:
Great post mate.blackpool72 said:I believe climate change is real but one of the main causes for me is an ever increasing world population.
I have posted this before and some on here try and say it's not a major factor.
I disagree
1960. 3 billion
1970. 3 7 billion
1980. 4.45 billion
1990. 5.3 billion
2000. 6.1 billion
2010. 7.2 billion
2020. 8.3 billion.
The problem on here is if you have a different opinion as to the causes of climate change to some of you , you get heavy criticism.
A few days ago someone who posts regularly on here labeled people blaming a rise in the population as neo fascists.
Well i suppose I must be one then because I firmly believe the more the world's population increases the greater our need for ever more water, food, energy and everything else.
Its been the same for years mate as you know. Its now the same little troupe on a few threads. Some must have brains like medicine balls such is their great depth of so called knowledge (ie google).
Dare anyone see things in a different way particularly based on their own life experience out come the usual insults as demonstrated on this page alone.
But what would help is those who want everyone else to do something and not them. As demonstrated on the previous pages...0
