State the bleedin obvious!

[UNG]

As I said before, the science is very well argued, researched and demonstratably actually correct - challenge it if you wish, you will be wrong.

So doing the PC thing again

All points very well discussed if you care to go read the scientific press, but do look at the CO2 chart above and tell me what's natural about it.

I forgot to throw in the winter of 1963 the coldest for more than 200 years with temperatures lower than -20°C and the sea freezing in places so did we have a shortage in CO2 emissions that year

another ****e argument classic of the likes of the Daily Mail - no one is suggesting we go back to the stone age, or stand by a red telephone box on the corner of the street, or live in a tango'd cave

 Another Daily Mail gammon argument, Greta was offered a lift on a boat that was crossing the Atlantic anyway, and whose crew would have flown back anyway. She could have made life easy for herself and flown, but chosses to live by a set of principles as best she can. As for being a puppet of others, more horse manure from the people who hate the fact a 15 year old girl is making them feel guilty and is correct. The only agenda is not destroying our one and only home and most of the wildlife on it. As I keep saying, go read the scientific press, or even just go listen to David Attenborough if you can't be bothered to wade through all the science, it's a lot quicker. 

You can always tell when someone has no better argument that old chestnut the Daily Mail is brought up as some derogatory insult to a persons intelligence surly you are better than that

As shutting down the internet and mobile phone networks would massively reduce CO2 emissions worldwide surely it really needs to be considered if we are going to save the planet to argue against it would be contrary to your ethos

Ahh Greta was offered was offered a lift on a boat that happened to be crossing the Atlantic for absolutely no reason at all as it came straight back with a different crew so I would conclude that one of her backers needed some high profile publicity for their cutting edge boat, it may have been more prudent for the boat to have returned with the same crew but maybe that was a fail on their part. There are other parts of Greta's trip that are also questionable but they are all probably horse manure to you

As for David Attenborough he has spent many years flying around the world making a lot of money with his programmes and pumping large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere and now is no doubt making money preaching the gospel of climate change as written by the scientists of choice

A few years ago I had a conversation with a couple of science bods at Cambridge University when my daughter was studying there they were very single minded in their thoughts on climate change and would not listen to any other argument other than CO2 was the one and only cause as with @steptoe I asked them the same question and was fobbed off

We know there has been 2 or 3 ice ages in the last few million years what caused them and what ended them, does that not suggest there may be a cyclic cause of which CO2 may be a small part along with changes to the earth's orbit of the sun, changes to the earth's rotational plane and let's not forget the moons relation to the earth. And then we need to consider how our light source the sun has changed in the same period and how that may have changed our climate

The argument that CO2 is the out and out main cause is really debatable but science is all about funding from big business which can sway the independence of any scientific result

 

[Geoff1946]

All I can say is that if it is all true, at the armageddon scale being preached by the activists, then God help us because our politicians don't seem to have much idea.

 

[Sharpend]

So it's a natural cycle of cooling down and heating up,? 

That would be my thoughts,

why is heating up this time any different,?

I could say it’s the rate of change, but then I wasn’t around at the last heating up cycle to have anything to compare it too???

All I can say is that if it is all true, at the armageddon scale being preached by the activists, then God help us because our politicians don't seem to have much idea.

And HE probably will. 

 

[binky]

So doing the PC thing again

No, just challenging you to prove me wrong if you can, which you clearly can't. 

i refer you back to the CO2 chart, individual weather events mean nothing in their own right, it's the overall trend that matters. Now have a look at the global temperature charts since the start of the industrial revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record - spot the correlation. 

 

 

[binky]

I could say it’s the rate of change, but then I wasn’t around at the last heating up cycle to have anything to compare it too???

This is the crux of the matter, whatever ended the last ice age took 20,000 years. What we are creating is rapid change in a mere 200 years and this does not allow the flaura and fauna of the planet to evolve and adapt or people to relocate - nature can't cope and will therefore fail, along with our food and way of life. 

 

[steptoe]

This is the crux of the matter, whatever ended the last ice age took 20,000 years. What we are creating is rapid change in a mere 200 years and this does not allow the flaura and fauna of the planet to evolve and adapt or people to relocate - nature can't cope and will therefore fail, along with our food and way of life. 

We don't know how long it took to heat the planet from the ice age, 

Science in this case is not, and cannot be conclusive, 

It is at best educated guesswork, and speculation. 

No one was there to witness and record those events. 

 

[binky]

We don't know how long it took to heat the planet from the ice age, 

Science in this case is not, and cannot be conclusive, 

It is at best educated guesswork, and speculation. 

No one was there to witness and record those events. 

This is very true, science conot works on facts when forecasting, but best hypothesis from the available data - there is evidence for the length of time from multiple disciplines. Either way it certainly wasn't 200 years. Have a search of other articles other then the one I posted, there are bound to be different opinions, but lets just say it was a long time. 

 

[binky]

did a quick search and found this article which is short enough to read and not written in scientific terms, but which puts the various issues together quite well.

https://warmheartworldwide.org/climate-change/?gclid=CjwKCAjw092IBhAwEiwAxR1lRkCeL6j1gIOZWoBTVY_KUb--TVk-NTujCO5lTFEL6eBteli1Mi_PGBoC_Y0QAvD_BwE

 

[binky]

A few more short articles - feel free to read the really scientific papers if you wish, but they aren't much fun! 

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/basics-of-climate-change/

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

 

[steptoe]

As I said before,

Science cannot answer this, science is based on actual facts, there are no actual facts about the last ice age, simply conjecture,

It's all on averages, 

Now, not for one minute am I saying that what we are doing isn't harmful to the planet, but no one knows for sure, how harmful, if at all, and it's not simply nature's way, 

Science can neither prove nor disprove this, in the same way science now has disproved lots of things the science "proved" years ago, 

Science used to be thought of as a fact, nowadays science is being used to "prove" things it cannot, and it is therefore no longer science, but merely opinion, an informed opinion perhaps, but still only an opinion, and not actual science. 

 

[Andy™]

As I said before,

Science cannot answer this, science is based on actual facts, there are no actual facts about the last ice age, simply conjecture,

It's all on averages, 

Now, not for one minute am I saying that what we are doing isn't harmful to the planet, but no one knows for sure, how harmful, if at all, and it's not simply nature's way, 

Science can neither prove nor disprove this, in the same way science now has disproved lots of things the science "proved" years ago, 

Science used to be thought of as a fact, nowadays science is being used to "prove" things it cannot, and it is therefore no longer science, but merely opinion, an informed opinion perhaps, but still only an opinion, and not actual science. 

and thats part of the issue, how do we know all these things happened in the past? i.e Binkys CO2 levels chart. there wasnt anyone around thousands of years ago measuring the values. these 'values' are all, at best, a guess by using whatever can be found to backup the claim. it may be true, but equally, it may no be true. same with the ice age thing. what caused it to melt? no one can say for certain. did it even exist? again, no one was around to witness / record it so all we can go by is best guess going on what evidence we can find to back it up. for every bit of evidence suggesting something has / hasnt happened, something else completely different could have occurred and we wouldnt know any different. there's always other theories about what happened. is the little know one actually true and the more commonly accepted answer completely wrong? realistically, owe can only really use data within the last few hundred years as being reasonably accurate and beyond doubt

humans are definately causing problems and most likely accelerating whats going on, but we are not the sole cause and a lot of it was going to happen anyway

 

[binky]

THe CO2 trapped in the deep ice is factual, you can also measure pollutants such as ash from major volcanic eruptions, have a read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core#:~:text=An ice core is a,over a range of years.

Now the scientific community spent many years / decades argueing about what the information actually means before coming to a general consensus that Global Warming is man made about 25 years ago. 

We work in a science based industry, your entire life is built around science, eg the concrete in your house is a scientifically designed product. When you go on holiday you fly in a scientifically designed aircraft, or if you are ill and need an MRI scan. Your Covid vaccine is very much designed by science. I could go on, but I think you get my drift. So at what point do you stop trusting scince? I appreciate science has also got things badly wrong at times, but with regards to climate change, it has been subjeccted to very rigorous inspection and argument from many different scientific disciplines.

Climate Change is a complicated subject that I'm not that expert in, so do please go have a good read of info from reliable sources. 

 

[Andy™]

all those things youve mentioned are recent and mostly desgined / made by humans and are reasonably well documented and the facts known as people have been around / working on them since the beginning of them. concrete is well known to humans. weve been using it a while now and its properties are fairly well known. even so, it doesnt always work as intended. geneva bridge, that building in florida. yes there were some other factors, but they still collapsed. that plane built on science. well planes are far better these days than they were, but thats through learning from past mistakes (which are known ashumans have witnessed them) and changing designs. even then, crashes do still happen because of other unexpected causes. not exactly fool proof

vaccines / covid... again, not an exact science. doesnt always work exactly as intended. people have died as a direct result of it. scientists have done a good job with the time & resources they have, but again, its not perfect

that ice core thats thousands of years old. how are you absolutely certain its that age since no one was around to verify it was frozen in that specific age range... simple, you dont. its purely best guess going by what you  know and you can say it most likely is from that date, but equally, something unusual may have happened at a different time and affected it and you wouldnt know because no one was there to document it...

simple fact is, anything that happened thousands of years ago is mostly irrelevant imo, you can guess as to what happened and why, but you cannot verify any of it as being factually correct since there wasnt anyoe around at the time to document it

 

[binky]

all those things youve mentioned are recent and mostly desgined / made by humans and are reasonably well documented and the facts known as people have been around / working on them since the beginning of them. concrete is well known to humans. weve been using it a while now and its properties are fairly well known. even so, it doesnt always work as intended. geneva bridge, that building in florida. yes there were some other factors, but they still collapsed. that plane built on science. well planes are far better these days than they were, but thats through learning from past mistakes (which are known ashumans have witnessed them) and changing designs. even then, crashes do still happen because of other unexpected causes. not exactly fool proof

vaccines / covid... again, not an exact science. doesnt always work exactly as intended. people have died as a direct result of it. scientists have done a good job with the time & resources they have, but again, its not perfect

that ice core thats thousands of years old. how are you absolutely certain its that age since no one was around to verify it was frozen in that specific age range... simple, you dont. its purely best guess going by what you  know and you can say it most likely is from that date, but equally, something unusual may have happened at a different time and affected it and you wouldnt know because no one was there to document it...

simple fact is, anything that happened thousands of years ago is mostly irrelevant imo, you can guess as to what happened and why, but you cannot verify any of it as being factually correct since there wasnt anyoe around at the time to document it

 Covid vaccine, parts per million issues, concrete, been around since the Romans, air planes crashes now seem to be human error or SAM missile, but again with around 40 million flights per year, that's parts per million. Science has improved an awful lot, especially with the aid of computers so failure rates are far far less than they used to be, and failures are usually because someone cheapskated something somewhere. Documentation isn't always that accurate either, as it depends on the knowledge and viewpoint of the person writing the document. As I said, go read up on ice cores and I think you will find it's a lot more accurate than a best guess and a very valuable source of infomation. Anyway, whatever your viewpoint on the past, you can clearly see the changes the planet is undergoing right now, with 3 of the warmest years on record being within the last 5 years. https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/2020-was-one-of-three-warmest-years-record

 

[Andy™]

 Covid vaccine, parts per million issues, concrete, been around since the Romans, air planes crashes now seem to be human error or SAM missile, but again with around 40 million flights per year, that's parts per million. Science has improved an awful lot, especially with the aid of computers so failure rates are far far less than they used to be, and failures are usually because someone cheapskated something somewhere. Documentation isn't always that accurate either, as it depends on the knowledge and viewpoint of the person writing the document. As I said, go read up on ice cores and I think you will find it's a lot more accurate than a best guess and a very valuable source of infomation. Anyway, whatever your viewpoint on the past, you can clearly see the changes the planet is undergoing right now, with 3 of the warmest years on record being within the last 5 years. https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/2020-was-one-of-three-warmest-years-record

it is all best guess... if you have a bit of ice 30,000 years old, how do you know that? did someone write that date on it when it froze 30,000 years ago? no? then its age is purely a guess based on whats known now. and as science has proven many times, stuff that was considered as correct years ago based on what was known at the time, has been proven to be incorrect. so still back to we dont know with absolute certainty what happened many years ago. in 5, 10, 100 years, someone could discover something that throws all current theories out the window as being incorrect and wonder how we even came to that conclusion in the first place

no idea why you are trying to compare something thats claimed happened thousands / millions of years ago with something thats happened recetly within the last few hundred years

yes, we can clearly see something is happening, but we dont know for certain if its purely man made, natural cycle or a mix of both. personally, mix of both, but i doubt we are causing it as much as some claim. either way, itll all be fine once we run out of oil and thrown back to stone age...

 

[binky]

if you can count to 30,000 without missing a layer it's accurate  :^O   https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/weather-and-climate/climate-change/ice-cores/dating-a-core/

I'm not comparing anything, the scientists are doing that, it's their job! I'm sure in a hundred years time, they will have a better understanding of what is happening now and how to solve the problem. We have a lot more scientists than in the past, we have satellite mapping techniques that make monitoring data far easier. We have the internet to share info and speed up the whole studying of issues and link different disciplines eg geoligists https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-say-about-global-warming/#:~:text=The most important lessons drawn,high atmospheric carbon dioxide level. We live in the age of information ( and disinformation for that matter), so the science is faster, better scrutinised, and more reliable than just 30 years ago.

OK, there are clearly natural cycles also shown by the ice core data, but the data also clearly shows we are having a major impact, not just by buring fossil fuels, but that is a main indicator. Light a fire in your living room and it will get wamer, bung more fuel on and it will get warmer faster. A I siad before, the climate science would suggest we should be due a mini ice age, yet the world is getting warmer. Thee are loads of thongs that affect the climate such as chopping down trees, eating more meat and dairy products, buying ****e from China so it has to be transported half way around the world, cheap flights meaning it's now normal to fly to Rome for a weekend. Chuck in forest fires, which are becoming more frequent,  which then spread black ash over the ice sheets, which in turn then melt faster, increasing population of the owrld putting more demand on the worlds resources. We havn't had a major volcano eruption for a while either (could probably do with a big cloud of ash to block sunlight? ).

What happens next is still subject to much argument. Worse case scenario for the UK is that with the demise of the Artic ice sheets, the gulf stream that keeps us a mild and gentle climate stops coming our way, and we get far colder. Melting of the permafrost (which has already started) is also serious as this will release major amounts of methane which is 30-40 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. So the question is, do we do nothing and find out how bad things can get, or respond quickly now to prevent finding out the hard way? I know which option I prefer, as I also reckon it's far cheaper than finding out the hard way and keeps the planet in a condition we know and love. And guess who will get to pay for the damage done. This is just one article on the subject  https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/climate-change-has-cost-the-us-billions-of-dollars-in-flood-damage.html

 

[Andy™]

definately need to be doing something. life cant keep going on the way it currently is and expect it to work out well

if you can count to 30,000 without missing a layer it's accurate  :^O   https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/weather-and-climate/climate-change/ice-cores/dating-a-core/

and what happens if it was slightly warmer for 1000 years and 1000 layers didnt happen, but because they are not there, your count is not 1000 off, but you dont know it?

 

[steptoe]

if you can count to 30,000 without missing a layer it's accurate  :^O   https://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/weather-and-climate/climate-change/ice-cores/dating-a-core/

I'm not comparing anything, the scientists are doing that, it's their job! I'm sure in a hundred years time, they will have a better understanding of what is happening now and how to solve the problem. We have a lot more scientists than in the past, we have satellite mapping techniques that make monitoring data far easier. We have the internet to share info and speed up the whole studying of issues and link different disciplines eg geoligists https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-say-about-global-warming/#:~:text=The most important lessons drawn,high atmospheric carbon dioxide level. We live in the age of information ( and disinformation for that matter), so the science is faster, better scrutinised, and more reliable than just 30 years ago.

OK, there are clearly natural cycles also shown by the ice core data, but the data also clearly shows we are having a major impact, not just by buring fossil fuels, but that is a main indicator. Light a fire in your living room and it will get wamer, bung more fuel on and it will get warmer faster. A I siad before, the climate science would suggest we should be due a mini ice age, yet the world is getting warmer. Thee are loads of thongs that affect the climate such as chopping down trees, eating more meat and dairy products, buying ****e from China so it has to be transported half way around the world, cheap flights meaning it's now normal to fly to Rome for a weekend. Chuck in forest fires, which are becoming more frequent,  which then spread black ash over the ice sheets, which in turn then melt faster, increasing population of the owrld putting more demand on the worlds resources. We havn't had a major volcano eruption for a while either (could probably do with a big cloud of ash to block sunlight? ).

What happens next is still subject to much argument. Worse case scenario for the UK is that with the demise of the Artic ice sheets, the gulf stream that keeps us a mild and gentle climate stops coming our way, and we get far colder. Melting of the permafrost (which has already started) is also serious as this will release major amounts of methane which is 30-40 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. So the question is, do we do nothing and find out how bad things can get, or respond quickly now to prevent finding out the hard way? I know which option I prefer, as I also reckon it's far cheaper than finding out the hard way and keeps the planet in a condition we know and love. And guess who will get to pay for the damage done. This is just one article on the subject  https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/climate-change-has-cost-the-us-billions-of-dollars-in-flood-damage.html

You are proposing, at best, educated guesswork, as being a FACT, it's not, it is simply an educated guess, as has been pointed out to you

 

[binky]

definately need to be doing something. life cant keep going on the way it currently is and expect it to work out well

and what happens if it was slightly warmer for 1000 years and 1000 layers didnt happen, but because they are not there, your count is not 1000 off, but you dont know it?

of course it never snows in the antartic in winter... go figure, even better go read the very many articles available. 

 

[binky]

You are proposing, at best, educated guesswork, as being a FACT, it's not, it is simply an educated guess, as has been pointed out to you

except that things I read 30 years ago are coming true and becoming fact - very very well educated guesswork if you ask me. Lets be frank, we get people posing questions on here all the time about problems with their electrics. How many times do we make eductaed guesses as to the root causes of a problem and get it right? And we do that because we have many years experience and are quite expert in the field of electrictal systems. There is always room for error, nothing is 100% perfect, but if you care to go read instead of arguing semantics, I'll think you will find the planet has a big problem caused by mankind. Although as I have also previously said, the planet will survive regardless, it's still got billions of years before the sun supernovas and wipes the planet out. Note the costs in the second article.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-melting-permafrost-is-beginning-to-transform-the-arctic

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/14/thawing-permafrost-destroying-arctic-cities-norilsk-russia