Climate Catasrophe

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Climate Catasrophe

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 15 of 17 < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

Teddy Eagle 29 Jan 20 10.44pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I think you need to read all of that report before making comments. It doesn't say what you said it does. All it suggests is that as the switch to renewables has accelerated quicker than originally anticipated the worst case scenarios are now more unlikely. It was always the case that the outcome of possibilities were within a range, and what it says is that the lower levels now look more probable. Which is good news, but as these are still above the levels that scientists believe are sustainable not really that good. Just not imminent disaster. There is heaps of data available that suggest that man's contribution is 100%! This one says it's above 100% as the natural variation has been towards a cooling, thus mitigating some of man's impact:- [Link] Don't like that one, or suspect it might be "biased". Do you trust NASA? If so look at this:- [Link] A more than 100% contribution? How does that work?
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

29 Jan 20 10.44pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I think you need to read all of that report before making comments. It doesn't say what you said it does. All it suggests is that as the switch to renewables has accelerated quicker than originally anticipated the worst case scenarios are now more unlikely. It was always the case that the outcome of possibilities were within a range, and what it says is that the lower levels now look more probable. Which is good news, but as these are still above the levels that scientists believe are sustainable not really that good. Just not imminent disaster.

There is heaps of data available that suggest that man's contribution is 100%! This one says it's above 100% as the natural variation has been towards a cooling, thus mitigating some of man's impact:-

[Link]

Don't like that one, or suspect it might be "biased". Do you trust NASA? If so look at this:-

[Link]

A more than 100% contribution? How does that work?

Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 29 Jan 20 10.45pm
I find the whole climate debate tiring. Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop. The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s***ting on their doorstep. Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 29 Jan 20 10.45pm

I find the whole climate debate tiring.

Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop.

The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s***ting on their doorstep.

Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 12.03pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle A more than 100% contribution? How does that work? That was explained both by me and in the article. Natural climate change appears to have tended towards cooling thus mitigating man's impact. It might be semantics but it makes a point nevertheless. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 12.03pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

A more than 100% contribution? How does that work?

That was explained both by me and in the article.

Natural climate change appears to have tended towards cooling thus mitigating man's impact. It might be semantics but it makes a point nevertheless.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 30 Jan 20 12.18pm
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC I find the whole climate debate tiring. Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop. The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s*ting on their doorstep. Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing Sort of agree, but unless we tell China and India they can’t prosper as the west has then there’s no stopping that train. Very much agree on plastic. I love how plastic bags are a criminal act whereas manufacturers, including supermarket own labels are covered in the s, and lots of it unnecessary. Pulling carrier bags takes no time but ask them to cut down on packaging and you’ll be waiting years. COYP*
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 30 Jan 20 12.18pm

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

I find the whole climate debate tiring.

Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop.

The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s***ting on their doorstep.

Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing

Sort of agree, but unless we tell China and India they can’t prosper as the west has then there’s no stopping that train.

Very much agree on plastic. I love how plastic bags are a criminal act whereas manufacturers, including supermarket own labels are covered in the s***, and lots of it unnecessary. Pulling carrier bags takes no time but ask them to cut down on packaging and you’ll be waiting years.

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Jan 20 12.46pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle That was explained both by me and in the article. Natural climate change appears to have tended towards cooling thus mitigating man's impact. It might be semantics but it makes a point nevertheless. It’s entirely semantic but there can’t be more than a 100% contribution to anything.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Jan 20 12.46pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That was explained both by me and in the article.

Natural climate change appears to have tended towards cooling thus mitigating man's impact. It might be semantics but it makes a point nevertheless.

It’s entirely semantic but there can’t be more than a 100% contribution to anything.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 30 Jan 20 1.27pm
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC I find the whole climate debate tiring. Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop. The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s*ting on their doorstep. Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate** and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing Agreed the other day the CEO of the American fizzy drink company that is the largest user of plastic bottles (millions of tons) claimed that the public like them. That is exactly the challenge that Greta and the ER people should pick up on. Use you profile to urge people to start boycotting that companies drinks until they do something about it. Nothing hurts a company more than falling sales. Greta and Co now have a large public profile but what are the going to do with it. If they have any sense there are plenty of ways they can start campaigns which are immediate and easy to implement. She has just registered "Fridays for Future" well how about asking her followers to stay off their phones and tablets one day a week. I tend to listen to people who are proactive we can all virtue signal I am more interested in solutions. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 30 Jan 20 1.27pm

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

I find the whole climate debate tiring.

Point scoring is irrelevant - warming or no warming, man made or not, poisoning the planet in as many different and fantastical ways as possible is not good for anyone or anything, full stop.

The wrong debate is being had here - it really doesn’t matter who is right regarding ‘climate change’. People should stop bickering and s***ting on their doorstep.

Personally I think plastic pollution is the big one, it’s tangible, immediate and who knows - might even begin to cause fertility issues. Which in some cases, might not be a bad thing

Agreed the other day the CEO of the American fizzy drink company that is the largest user of plastic bottles (millions of tons) claimed that the public like them.

That is exactly the challenge that Greta and the ER people should pick up on. Use you profile to urge people to start boycotting that companies drinks until they do something about it. Nothing hurts a company more than falling sales.

Greta and Co now have a large public profile but what are the going to do with it. If they have any sense there are plenty of ways they can start campaigns which are immediate and easy to implement. She has just registered "Fridays for Future" well how about asking her followers to stay off their phones and tablets one day a week.

I tend to listen to people who are proactive we can all virtue signal I am more interested in solutions.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 8.50pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle It’s entirely semantic but there can’t be more than a 100% contribution to anything. Of course not. That's why it was just making the point that without natural variation lessening the impact man's contribution would have resulted in an even worse situation. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 8.50pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

It’s entirely semantic but there can’t be more than a 100% contribution to anything.

Of course not. That's why it was just making the point that without natural variation lessening the impact man's contribution would have resulted in an even worse situation.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Jan 20 9.02pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Of course not. That's why it was just making the point that without natural variation lessening the impact man's contribution would have resulted in an even worse situation. So man’s contribution has gone from zero percent to the creation and receding of the previous five ice ages to 100% to the current situation. Maybe global warming and cooling is a natural variation.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Jan 20 9.02pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Of course not. That's why it was just making the point that without natural variation lessening the impact man's contribution would have resulted in an even worse situation.

So man’s contribution has gone from zero percent to the creation and receding of the previous five ice ages to 100% to the current situation. Maybe global warming and cooling is a natural variation.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 9.33pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle So man’s contribution has gone from zero percent to the creation and receding of the previous five ice ages to 100% to the current situation. Maybe global warming and cooling is a natural variation. Why don't you read the reports and reach your own conclusions? As the overwhelming majority of specialist scientific opinion all reaches a similar conclusion I am not looking for other explanations. How we respond is another debate but that we must is a settled argument so far as I am concerned. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Jan 20 9.33pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Why don't you read the reports and reach your own conclusions? As the overwhelming majority of specialist scientific opinion all reaches a similar conclusion I am not looking for other explanations.

How we respond is another debate but that we must is a settled argument so far as I am concerned.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Jan 20 9.36pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Why don't you read the reports and reach your own conclusions? As the overwhelming majority of specialist scientific opinion all reaches a similar conclusion I am not looking for other explanations. How we respond is another debate but that we must is a settled argument so far as I am concerned. But you concede the point that there were ice ages before there were any people?
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Jan 20 9.36pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Why don't you read the reports and reach your own conclusions? As the overwhelming majority of specialist scientific opinion all reaches a similar conclusion I am not looking for other explanations.

How we respond is another debate but that we must is a settled argument so far as I am concerned.

But you concede the point that there were ice ages before there were any people?

Alert a moderator to this post

ex hibitionist Hastings 30 Jan 20 11.14pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle But you concede the point that there were ice ages before there were any people? you lot are only jealous of young Greta bcos she has two things you don't have - and I don't mean t*ts - I mean morals and intellect. And how can a supposed football fan argue that you can't give more than 100%? Are you calling Steven Gerrard, Steve McClaren, Kevin Keegan and all the rest liars? And Sir David Attenborough come to think of it.
Alert a moderator to this post

ex hibitionist

Hastings 30 Jan 20 11.14pm

Send a Private Message to ex hibitionist

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

But you concede the point that there were ice ages before there were any people?

you lot are only jealous of young Greta bcos she has two things you don't have - and I don't mean t*ts - I mean morals and intellect. And how can a supposed football fan argue that you can't give more than 100%? Are you calling Steven Gerrard, Steve McClaren, Kevin Keegan and all the rest liars? And Sir David Attenborough come to think of it.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 31 Jan 20 12.13am
Originally posted by ex hibitionist you lot are only jealous of young Greta bcos she has two things you don't have - and I don't mean t*ts - I mean morals and intellect. And how can a supposed football fan argue that you can't give more than 100%? Are you calling Steven Gerrard, Steve McClaren, Kevin Keegan and all the rest liars? And Sir David Attenborough come to think of it. Unfortunately you incorrectly applied the word 'jealous' when you meant 'envious' to make a point about intelligence. Jealously is the fear of losing something to an external threat, like your girlfriend to a former boyfriend for example. Envy is when you wish for something someone else has. Many, many people make this mistake because...well...an education requires focus and effort. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

31 Jan 20 12.13am

Originally posted by ex hibitionist

Unfortunately you incorrectly applied the word 'jealous' when you meant 'envious' to make a point about intelligence.

Jealously is the fear of losing something to an external threat, like your girlfriend to a former boyfriend for example.

Envy is when you wish for something someone else has.

Many, many people make this mistake because...well...an education requires focus and effort.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 15 of 17 < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Climate Catasrophe

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors