CO2 levels are not natural

Talk Electrician Forum

Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
oh definetly, but no-one argues with those graphs, 
I'm not sure you picked the best set of graphs to argue your point, as all I see is CO2 has gone off the scale while temperature sits at a remarkably stable value, thus appearing to demonstrate increased CO2 is NOT increasing temperature.

 
but temperatures are increasing Dave, and the point of those graphs is to demonstrate the mechanism for the rises is not a natural cycle, but down to the activity of mankind. The natural cycles are still in place, such as the activity of the sun. Whether you believe C02 is an issue or not, it clearly indicates, that our current energy usage is high and getting higher and needs to change if we are to avoid more environmantal damage. You and me both agree reducing the world population is the real answer, but as that is unliley to happen, then reducing the impact of the world population needs to happen, and that involves working with nature rather than against. The recent floods have been partly caused by building houses in the wrong places, but also farming practics on the higher ground, whereby farmers get paid to turn land over to grazing, rather than leave it as a natural water trap ie bog. Can't blame the farmers for trying to make a living in difficult circumstances, but this is another example of mankind impacting the environment in a negative way.

Oddly enough, despite an increasing UK population, total energy demand in the UK has decreased as energy efficiency has become the 'norm'. Not reduced enough to save building power stations though!

 
I am all in favour of reducing our energy use (Why do you think I am currently building a house that will be as near as dam it a passive house)  What I object to is the way we are being treated like naughty school boys and "punished " by punitive taxes to try and change our ways.

Starting with building regulations and insisting ALL new houses are near passive house standard would be a start. And it's no good just charging punitive taxes on fossils fuel if there is no alternative, while at the same time just about closing down the solar PV industry.

but my skepticism really relates to that graph you presented that shows temperature should already be off the scale, not just rising very slowly.

Oh and CO2 emissions must ALREADY have reduced drastically since the worst of the industrial revolution when nobody knew about such things.

 
Another thing that makes me treat all this scare mongering as bull is when people show graphs it is spread over hundreds of thousands of years. When they talk about recent events they talk about the last 20 years. 20 years on that graph is smaller than a pin head. 

Binky - you say 37,000 scientists is a small number but in earlier posts you say that scientists would not risk their reputation for bogus research. 

Not long ago ago we were in drought conditions. No decent rainfall for years. Global warming they said. 

Two years of of bad snow. Global warming they said. 

Two years of of strong rainfall. Global warming they said. 

Strong winds. Global warming they said. 

Floods. Global warming they said. 

I am am all up for being convinced and my mind is open but the arguements for MMCC cannot be substantiated. The pro-MMCC camp make any change in weather conditions down to global warming. It is embarrassing to even suggest they should be taken seriously when they move the goal posts so frequently. 

By by all means we should look after the planet but let's educate people in making them believe it will just be a more pleasant place to be. Do not scare people into thinking they are to blame for everything so governments can tax people to the hilt. 

 
If you live in Manchester 5.1% of you will die as a direct result of air pollution. Now I have no idea of any global warming, or increases in Co2 emission's, all I know is that people are dying.

I wonder where that air pollution is coming from? It cannot be anything man made, after all Co2 emissions have always increased after a freeze.

It was cold last week, is that what is meant by big freeze?

 
If you live in Manchester 5.1% of you will die as a direct result of air pollution. Now I have no idea of any global warming, or increases in Co2 emission's, all I know is that people are dying.

I wonder where that air pollution is coming from? It cannot be anything man made, after all Co2 emissions have always increased after a freeze.

It was cold last week, is that what is meant by big freeze?


Where is that statistic from and how do they come to that conclusion?

 
its the last 150 years that has seen the big rise in CO2 - ie the combination of industrialisation and population growth. The fact that these events is so recent is the cause of concern when we can demonstraate that for the previous 599,850 years it isn't normal.

A hotter weather system means we get bigger weather events, which means we get bigger droughts, bigger floods, bigger hurricanes etc etc. I read an article in New Scientist over 25 years ago forecasting exactly this.

People are people, we all want bigger houses, cars, more food, etc etc. We also all want our children to have a better life than we did. The zealots on both sides spoil everything by over stating the facts, and reducing belief in the good science done by so many, but they feel justifed as this is the way to grab headlines, because otherwise people don't listen cos X factor is more important :shakehead

The simple fact is if you can persude 6 billion people (or even a few on here) to think about how the use / waste resources and persuade them to be more frugal and efficient, it will have big impact. Governmants could certainly do more, taxation isn't the answer, tax relief is, but sometimes you need a big stick. If you can't persuade people to behave in a different way, then attacking the pocket tends to work, especially in reference to big business. Governmants can be instrumental in promoting good behaviour like installing solar panels, they can also be winkers in destroying green tech industry. I actually get annoyed by many environmantalists, we should build more hydro-electric, but they keep moaning about destroying the natural landscape - isn't sacrificing 1 or 2 valleys worth providing green energy which in turn protects wildlife elsewhere??

Manator, people die in all urban areas, apart from deprivation, it's mostly down to air pollution, in particlar Nitrous Oxides and fine particulates, especially from diesel vehicles

 
been many studies relating to people living close to spagehtti junction.

On tonights local news was an article saying people who live on the coast live longer - clean air??

forgot to say Essex, education is the way forward, hence I spend time on here trying to educate....feels like this mostly headbang    :^O

 
So following your theory Essex will the next major event be global cooling? 

I can't keep up, personally its all down to globalisation! 


My ONLY theory is that no one has any idea about what is really happening. So let's just all do the right thing on a local level and look after our surroundings. Anything more is crap with zero proof. 

 
So you do support the idea that we are to blame!

Otherwise why would we need to do the right thing on a local level and look after our surroundings. 

The he truth is we don't need scientists to tell us the obvious they are only there to try and prove it. 

Obvious says: the more there are of us the greater damage we cause for this planet, -don't believe me then take a look at the amount of rubbish we bury because we ain't smart enough to know what else we should do with it. 

Scientist says: can I prove that this burying of waste is causing damage. 

 
Not at all.  Not one little bit. 

Again. One post is scientists would never lie. A day later - we don't need scientists to prove it. 

 
If you live in Manchester 5.1% of you will die as a direct result of air pollution. Now I have no idea of any global warming, or increases in Co2 emission's, all I know is that people are dying.

I wonder where that air pollution is coming from? It cannot be anything man made, after all Co2 emissions have always increased after a freeze.

It was cold last week, is that what is meant by big freeze?


Thanks,

I think I can run that % quite happily seeing as gun crime is a lot higher,

Have you any idea what the % of alcohol poisoning is,? :|

 
that graph Essex ties in with the ones I posted, we should be heading towards a cooling period instead of getting warmer. Scientists argue like heck, it's part of the job. They have, more or lessall  ageed climate change is happening over the last 10 years, but will continue to argue over the exact causes. This is normal, but they argree its an issue. As their understanding of climate science improves, so will the accuracy and level of consensus.

With regards to localism, this is always a good place to start, however next time you buy apples grown in China or New Zealand from Tesco, you are having an impact on the world well beyond your local area, likewise clothes, cars, domestic goods, electrical items etc etc, Your energy is generated somewhere else, possibly (most likely) by burning fossil fuels. Power stations have cleaaned up a lot, but it was only a few decades ago that Acid Rain from coal fired power stations was destroying the countryside in Norway and Sweden, so again what you do locally can have global effects. This is where governments (should) come into play, they have the means and power to deal with the more global based issues. Unfortuanetly that involves politicians who are short sighted to the point of stupidity......unless we all harass them ]:)

 
Top