Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Climate Emergency
Comments
-
Second train derailment in two days. Still, 1976 and all that. Nothing to see here.6
-
Not at all, just responding to your intimate knowlegde of a posters diet. What other way would you have such knowledge?TD_Addick said:
Stalker and Tarot card reading wow the fraudster has had his feathers rattled again, way off topic and insults shows you're losing the argument and getting bit flustered.cantersaddick said:
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".
And only in response to you once again starting the personals.
Keep trying tho hun2 -
I’d love the climate change to be a hoax.Even if it is, (I don’t believe it is), is that a reason not to make the world better than we found it.8
-
Even if the accusations are found to be true that still shows how much you miss the point. Those of us following the science on climate change are following 97% of all relevant scientists. Not one individual. If what we are saying was based on one individual scientist then you would have a point. But its not. Its based on many many thousands of scientists over more than 50 years of meticulous research.TD_Addick said:
Fauci or RFK couldn't care less because ultimately I'm not American the point I make is Fauci is a senior figure and scientist who lied. The climate change fear mongers love scientists, he lied and is a scientist.ShootersHillGuru said:TD_Addick has disappeared without answering who he’d prefer in charge. Fauci or RFK Jnr. I think if he gives the truthful answer we’ll all know enough about where he’s coming from.
You see the difference?
6 -
Exactly this. For a while this thread and others like it were a space for some of us to discuss new green technology, actions both local and national we were taking, national policy directions as well as various home adaptations for the hotter weather (and more extreme winters).charltonkeston said:Just like some/most of the places I have worked or even some of my friends, on here there are some contrary buggers.
They will swear black is white just to be different just to get a rise out of someone. This absolutely ruins forums, there are plenty of flat earther sites out there. I believe, like most normal people in the world, that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinion. But facts are not opinions, by all means have an opinion but keep shouting out the same old opinion will never make it a fact, unless of course you can back up your opinion with a peer reviewed fact.
Unfortunately as the evidence this summer has hit people in the face the noise around climate change has got louder and so the usual conspiracy idiots have come out swinging to try and ruin a thread. Shame.
4 -
A few weeks ago Japan was sweltering in 42C heat. They are now suffering from devastating floods ruining homes.TD_Addick said:Never said it was hoax just don't think it's the end of the world and many other factors cause the climate to shift. I agree with you the current American government is full of morons.
Europe has had record heat, glaciers are collapsing onto homes. Many homes have been lost to fire. Thousands of hectares of nature reserves have been devasted, some rare species may not recover.
Please have a look at one of the reputable news channels that have been showing pictures of the devastation in Stourbridge and how indiscriminately the fire spread.
Our emergency services are under even greater pressure than normal. Nurses collapsing from heat exhaustion. A&E under even more pressure than in the winter. Ambulance services having record numbers of call outs. The Fire and Rescue Services under pressure like never before.
This is just the start, it will get worse.3 -
He said he eats meat 3 times a week in a post to help the climate. Lol I wasn't outside his kitchen window looking in. 😂cantersaddick said:
Not at all, just responding to your intimate knowlegde of a posters diet. What other way would you have such knowledge?TD_Addick said:
Stalker and Tarot card reading wow the fraudster has had his feathers rattled again, way off topic and insults shows you're losing the argument and getting bit flustered.cantersaddick said:
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".
And only in response to you once again starting the personals.
Keep trying tho hun1 -
Yes and you claimed it was rubbish. There's no way to know whether or not he has cut his meat consumption down if you aren't either peering through his kitchen window or psychic.TD_Addick said:
He said he eats meat 3 times a week in a post to help the climate. Lol I wasn't outside his kitchen window looking in. 😂cantersaddick said:
Not at all, just responding to your intimate knowlegde of a posters diet. What other way would you have such knowledge?TD_Addick said:
Stalker and Tarot card reading wow the fraudster has had his feathers rattled again, way off topic and insults shows you're losing the argument and getting bit flustered.cantersaddick said:
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".
And only in response to you once again starting the personals.
Keep trying tho hun
Psychotic would also work I guess.2 -
I'm watching BBC News right now, 8 people have died after a month's rain fell in Tokyo in just 24 hours.
The devastation in Stourbridge completely destroyed 19 homes and a further 18 sustained damage. 19 people in hospital.
Thankfully the Government has temporarily banned the sale of disposable barbecues. It needs to be made permanent.
We all need to come together and demand the changes that make life tolerable now the effects of climate change are being felt across the world.
1 -
Not going to lie canters you've lost me on this one, my tiny brain perhaps not working fully today. Anyway think that's enough back and forth arguing gets bit boring after a while. Back to rumours thread to enjoy the good news of superstar Jones signing a contract.cantersaddick said:
Yes and you claimed it was rubbish. There's no way to know whether or not he has cut his meat consumption down if you aren't either peering through his kitchen window or psychic.TD_Addick said:
He said he eats meat 3 times a week in a post to help the climate. Lol I wasn't outside his kitchen window looking in. 😂cantersaddick said:
Not at all, just responding to your intimate knowlegde of a posters diet. What other way would you have such knowledge?TD_Addick said:
Stalker and Tarot card reading wow the fraudster has had his feathers rattled again, way off topic and insults shows you're losing the argument and getting bit flustered.cantersaddick said:
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".
And only in response to you once again starting the personals.
Keep trying tho hun
Psychotic would also work I guess.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Supposing he eats half a cow in one sitting?2
-
How you saving the planet if you're not bothered about pissing people off?cantersaddick said:
One of my aims in life is to piss off the right people. Seems I'm succeeding.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).
Also those wishing to preserve life and civilisation for future generations being called arriviste by the guy denying the crisis is the perfect demonstration of your cognitive dissonance.
Surely the aim is to try and get everyone onside?
3 -
He said: "I eat meat less"TD_Addick said:
Not going to lie canters you've lost me on this one, my tiny brain perhaps not working fully today. Anyway think that's enough back and forth arguing gets bit boring after a while. Back to rumours thread to enjoy the good news of superstar Jones signing a contract.cantersaddick said:
Yes and you claimed it was rubbish. There's no way to know whether or not he has cut his meat consumption down if you aren't either peering through his kitchen window or psychic.TD_Addick said:
He said he eats meat 3 times a week in a post to help the climate. Lol I wasn't outside his kitchen window looking in. 😂cantersaddick said:
Not at all, just responding to your intimate knowlegde of a posters diet. What other way would you have such knowledge?TD_Addick said:
Stalker and Tarot card reading wow the fraudster has had his feathers rattled again, way off topic and insults shows you're losing the argument and getting bit flustered.cantersaddick said:
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".
And only in response to you once again starting the personals.
Keep trying tho hun
Psychotic would also work I guess.
You said: "Rubbish you're a fraud"
I said: "how could you possibly know unless you are psychic or stalking him"0 -
We do exaggerate on here?
What percentage of people totally deny its climate change?
10%.2 -
I'll happily have a chat with anyone and everyone about this as I have with these people over a period of years on here eventually with some individuals you realise they are so far down the rabbit hole they are beyond help, or are bad faith actors. Pissing those off is fine with me. I'll still explain the facts to them but I'm not bothered if I piss them off.clb74 said:
How you saving the planet if you're not bothered about pissing people off?cantersaddick said:
One of my aims in life is to piss off the right people. Seems I'm succeeding.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).
Also those wishing to preserve life and civilisation for future generations being called arriviste by the guy denying the crisis is the perfect demonstration of your cognitive dissonance.
Surely the aim is to try and get everyone onside?
Everyone else I'll happily have a chat with for as long as they want if theyre genuinely interested.4 -
The people will demand change and if the government do make changes them same people will then moan it's excessive.ME14addick said:I'm watching BBC News right now, 8 people have died after a month's rain fell in Tokyo in just 24 hours.
The devastation in Stourbridge completely destroyed 19 homes and a further 18 sustained damage. 19 people in hospital.
Thankfully the Government has temporarily banned the sale of disposable barbecues. It needs to be made permanent.
We all need to come together and demand the changes that make life tolerable now the effects of climate change are being felt across the world.
The same people who say we need more homes as long as them new homes aren't built near my home2 -
100% true.clb74 said:
The people will demand change and if the government do make changes them same people will then moan it's excessive.ME14addick said:I'm watching BBC News right now, 8 people have died after a month's rain fell in Tokyo in just 24 hours.
The devastation in Stourbridge completely destroyed 19 homes and a further 18 sustained damage. 19 people in hospital.
Thankfully the Government has temporarily banned the sale of disposable barbecues. It needs to be made permanent.
We all need to come together and demand the changes that make life tolerable now the effects of climate change are being felt across the world.
The same people who say we need more homes as long as them new homes aren't built near my home2 -
O-Randy-Hunt said:
100% true.clb74 said:
The people will demand change and if the government do make changes them same people will then moan it's excessive.ME14addick said:I'm watching BBC News right now, 8 people have died after a month's rain fell in Tokyo in just 24 hours.
The devastation in Stourbridge completely destroyed 19 homes and a further 18 sustained damage. 19 people in hospital.
Thankfully the Government has temporarily banned the sale of disposable barbecues. It needs to be made permanent.
We all need to come together and demand the changes that make life tolerable now the effects of climate change are being felt across the world.
The same people who say we need more homes as long as them new homes aren't built near my home
Meanwhile, people are deliberately constructing strawmen so they can dismiss the argument and preserve the status quo, even as that status quo drives us further towards climate disaster.
2 -
I don't know how many, it's not scientific, but the number of people arguing against man made climate change on social media is considerable.clb74 said:We do exaggerate on here?
What percentage of people totally deny its climate change?
10%.
On Facebook in particular, there have been numerous pages reporting the heat health alerts, the Met Office weather warnings, UKHSA warnings & NHS warnings, yet many people dismiss them as scaremongering, and/or denying that the extreme weather is due to man made climate change.
We also have politicians pushing back the narrative on man made climate change, doungbthecwork.if their fossil fuel backers.
If only 10% of the population didn't believe in man made climate change, it would be a lot easier to get Governments to do more.0 -
The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.5
-
Sponsored links:
-
100% trueSELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.0 -
Not directed at you personally, SHGShootersHillGuru said:
Fauci has been accused by the republicans of lying which he denies by the way. I’ll admit I don’t know enough about this to give a valuable opinion. What I will opine on though is that he’s far more qualified to lead a public health organisation than the current moron.TD_Addick said:
Ducking the question about Fauci I see. What conspiracy are you talking about?ShootersHillGuru said:
So I’m right then. You’re just another conspiracy theorist with nutty views and are too afraid to actually spell them out.TD_Addick said:
Fauci or RFK couldn't care less because ultimately I'm not American the point I make is Fauci is a senior figure and scientist who lied. The climate change fear mongers love scientists, he lied and is a scientist.ShootersHillGuru said:TD_Addick has disappeared without answering who he’d prefer in charge. Fauci or RFK Jnr. I think if he gives the truthful answer we’ll all know enough about where he’s coming from.As for the conspiracy theory i think you subscribe to its, that man made climate change is a hoax.
Questioned by the State Homeland Security Committee about his alleged crimes, Fauci didn't deny anything, he didn't admit to or refute anything he was asked.
Why?
Because he exercised his right to 'Plead the Fifth', which effectively meant he didn't have to answer a question - or any question - that he thought might Incriminate him.
Infact, as he sat squirming in his seat like a guilty dog sitting in its own excrement, he took the fifth, not once, not twice but 111 times.
He refused to answer a single question, not one.
Cue snivels of 'Ner, he was just exercising his rights.'
He was, and that obviously proves beyond doubt that he had absolutely nothing to hide...
You can watch the whole of Fauci's hearing before the SHSC on YouTube.
Some people may find its content uncomfortable viewing
3 -
The next time you are being accused of something you may or may not have done and the police are asking you questions, your solicitor will advise you to answer, “no comment”.Redskin said:
Not directed at you personally, SHGShootersHillGuru said:
Fauci has been accused by the republicans of lying which he denies by the way. I’ll admit I don’t know enough about this to give a valuable opinion. What I will opine on though is that he’s far more qualified to lead a public health organisation than the current moron.TD_Addick said:
Ducking the question about Fauci I see. What conspiracy are you talking about?ShootersHillGuru said:
So I’m right then. You’re just another conspiracy theorist with nutty views and are too afraid to actually spell them out.TD_Addick said:
Fauci or RFK couldn't care less because ultimately I'm not American the point I make is Fauci is a senior figure and scientist who lied. The climate change fear mongers love scientists, he lied and is a scientist.ShootersHillGuru said:TD_Addick has disappeared without answering who he’d prefer in charge. Fauci or RFK Jnr. I think if he gives the truthful answer we’ll all know enough about where he’s coming from.As for the conspiracy theory i think you subscribe to its, that man made climate change is a hoax.
Questioned by the State Homeland Security Committee about his alleged crimes, Fauci didn't deny anything, he didn't admit to or refute anything he was asked.
Why?
Because he exercised his right to 'Plead the Fifth', which effectively meant he didn't have to answer a question - or any question - that he thought might Incriminate him.
Infact, as he sat squirming in his seat like a guilty dog sitting in its own excrement, he took the fifth, not once, not twice but 111 times.
He refused to answer a single question, not one.
Cue snivels of 'Ner, he was just exercising his rights.'
He was, and that obviously proves beyond doubt that he had absolutely nothing to hide...
You can watch the whole of Fauci's hearing before the SHSC on YouTube.
Some people may find its content uncomfortable viewingThat will your answer to any question2 -
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
4 -
What do you think India and China are doing to produce those emissions? They're making shit to sell to the West. Climate Change is globalisation's dirty little secret.mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.6 -
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.1 -
And asking the population to stop buying cheap products/tariff countries breaking carbon emission limits would cause outrage.Leroy Ambrose said:
What do you think India and China are doing to produce those emissions? They're making shit to sell to the West. Climate Change is globalisation's dirty little secret.mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
2 -
I actually agree with this that's why I would want to stop trade. The travel cost and impact alone would cut carbon emissions. I generally hate the fact we have exported our need to over consume onto the world.Leroy Ambrose said:
What do you think India and China are doing to produce those emissions? They're making shit to sell to the West. Climate Change is globalisation's dirty little secret.mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.5 -
ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Food security issues right now is more tied to war and our rising energy costs which has had less of an impact on new industrial powerhouses, which is the point I making.ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Secondly your renewables are cheaper bollox just isn't true. If it was the government wouldn't need to get involved the market would do it. As when you consider the cost to maintain, the reliability, and also balancing the power grid (look at Spain's blackouts this year) wind, solar and tidal just aren't where they need to be yet.
Now if where talking nuclear Which is clean, and relatively safe now. I just don't understand why we aren't going down this route.
I think you believe I'm a climate change denier. It's clearly happening and getting worse, however I haven't seen a good argument why my way of life should suffer even more, when what we are doing isn't making a meaningful impact.2 -
Agree with you on nuclear. Really dropped the ball on that one. Plants decommissioned without having replacement capacity on stream. Rare for me to be envious of the French 🤣mathew_davey said:ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Food security issues right now is more tied to war and our rising energy costs which has had less of an impact on new industrial powerhouses, which is the point I making.ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Secondly your renewables are cheaper bollox just isn't true. If it was the government wouldn't need to get involved the market would do it. As when you consider the cost to maintain, the reliability, and also balancing the power grid (look at Spain's blackouts this year) wind, solar and tidal just aren't where they need to be yet.
Now if where talking nuclear Which is clean, and relatively safe now. I just don't understand why we aren't going down this route.
I think you believe I'm a climate change denier. It's clearly happening and getting worse, however I haven't seen a good argument why my way of life should suffer even more, when what we are doing isn't making a meaningful impact.
The two new Hinckley reactors are now the best part of a decade behind original planned commissioning date, but hopefully the lessons learned will make the Sizewell ones quicker to get up and running as they're the same type.
1
