Current Affairs Environmental Stuff

[WA Toffee]

ok- basically i don`t believe the causes of `global warming` that are published. a few reasons- all their graphs and models have been debunked, from the scare stories in the 1990s to the `hockey stick` thing. obviously breathing carbon-monoxide isn`t good but while mega-corporations are poisoning nearly everything in sight, the government/media point the finger elsewhere. look up Earth-ships and their background, it was an off grid community so the utility companies lobbied the senate to kibosh all their plans. did you look-up `urban heat islands`? obviously mankind in such numbers is having an effect on the planet but i believe its miniscule. stopping the destruction of natural habitats is something we could all be involved in at a local level whether its Sefton Park meadows or Rimrose Valley nature reserve. so, i don`t believe carbon emissions are the problem.

I don't think the science that states burning fossil fuels creating CO2 has been debunked

I don't think the science saying CO2 absorbing heat has been debunked either

Or something that absorbs heat becoming warmer

Pretty sure a warmer atmosphere causing changes in weather has been shown to be quite a strong link too.

I'm wondering what it is you think that has actually been debunked, because it doesn't seem to be the science

 

[Oddball]

I don't think the science that states burning fossil fuels creating CO2 has been debunked

I don't think the science saying CO2 absorbing heat has been debunked either

Or something that absorbs heat becoming warmer

Pretty sure a warmer atmosphere causing changes in weather has been shown to be quite a strong link too.

I'm wondering what it is you think that has actually been debunked, because it doesn't seem to be the science

the graphs and models have been debunked. isn`t chemistry a different thing?

 

[Prevenger17]

did you look-up `urban heat islands`? obviously mankind in such numbers is having an effect on the planet but i believe its miniscule.

This is huge, call off the alarm you guys

 

[wm02]

Future generations will ask why we didn’t do more and just let things burn. Although blame will probably be deflected onto poor non white people.

Though I am not a climate scientist (primarily involved in strategic planning efforts), I work with NOAA here in the States. I recently worked on a project that had some tie-ins to environmental justice. To be honest, minorities (in the States, at least) currently suffer disproportionately from extreme weather events/climate change.
It takes various forms from to proximity to flood zones, inhabiting urban heat islands and parts of the country prone to extreme heat (think SW), etc.

 

[verreauxi]

ok- basically i don`t believe the causes of `global warming` that are published. a few reasons- all their graphs and models have been debunked, from the scare stories in the 1990s to the `hockey stick` thing. obviously breathing carbon-monoxide isn`t good but while mega-corporations are poisoning nearly everything in sight, the government/media point the finger elsewhere. look up Earth-ships and their background, it was an off grid community so the utility companies lobbied the senate to kibosh all their plans. did you look-up `urban heat islands`? obviously mankind in such numbers is having an effect on the planet but i believe its miniscule. stopping the destruction of natural habitats is something we could all be involved in at a local level whether its Sefton Park meadows or Rimrose Valley nature reserve. so, i don`t believe carbon emissions are the problem.

The science is quite solid about global warming. What is causing your skepticism is a long-term well-funded campaign by "big petrol" to fund various organizations, NGOs, institutes, and grassroots movements to sow seeds of doubt, which people (such as yourself, it seems) have bought into. The petrol-funded disinformation/misinformation campaign is well documented. You can see documents, interviews, and other information in support of what I just wrote here (among many other places):

The Power of Big Oil | FRONTLINE

Watch FRONTLINE's three-part documentary examining the fossil fuel industry’s history of casting doubt and delaying action on climate change.

www.pbs.org

No offense, but if you consider yourself an independent thinker, you've been duped by big-oil to pen your skepticism without any understanding of what you are writing about.

 

[WA Toffee]

the graphs and models have been debunked. isn`t chemistry a different thing?

I'm sure some have, not sure it is a majority, let alone all, as you suggested before.
Unless you are maybe applying extreme pedantry to the graphs to suggest they are incorrect.

And yes, chemistry is different. I'm glad you're not trying to debunk that ?

 

[Oddball]

The science is quite solid about global warming. What is causing your skepticism is a long-term well-funded campaign by "big petrol" to fund various organizations, NGOs, institutes, and grassroots movements to sow seeds of doubt, which people (such as yourself, it seems) have bought into. The petrol-funded disinformation/misinformation campaign is well documented. You can see documents, interviews, and other information in support of what I just wrote here (among many other places):

The Power of Big Oil | FRONTLINE

Watch FRONTLINE's three-part documentary examining the fossil fuel industry’s history of casting doubt and delaying action on climate change.

www.pbs.org

No offense, but if you consider yourself an independent thinker, you've been duped by big-oil to pen your skepticism without any understanding of what you are writing about.

i`m not offended and i don`t think i consider myself anything other than just some geezer (my preferred pro-noun) on the interweb. i was into environmental/conservation stuff ages before it became fashionable so when it started creeping into the mainstream it all seemed phoney, contrived and full of rhetoric. remember David Bellamy? he spoke out against the alarmist agenda and lost his career because he dared to go against the climate alarmists.

 

[Prevenger17]

i`m not offended and i don`t think i consider myself anything other than just some geezer (my preferred pro-noun) on the interweb. i was into environmental/conservation stuff ages before it became fashionable so when it started creeping into the mainstream it all seemed phoney, contrived and full of rhetoric. remember David Bellamy? he spoke out against the alarmist agenda and lost his career because he dared to go against the climate alarmists.

At least you've admitted you're completely clueless. Fair play

 

[Oddball]

1/ I don't think the science that states burning fossil fuels creating CO2 has been debunked

2/ I don't think the science saying CO2 absorbing heat has been debunked either

Or something that absorbs heat becoming warmer

Pretty sure a warmer atmosphere causing changes in weather has been shown to be quite a strong link too.

I'm wondering what it is you think that has actually been debunked, because it doesn't seem to be the science

1/ Plants absorb co2. - isn`t the simple answer to plant more trees instead of destroying millions of acres of woodland every year.
2/ tarmac absorbs the suns rays and it heats up. Plants absorb the suns rays and turn them into sugars/carbohydrates not heat.- isn`t the simple answer to stop tarmacing over everything and plant more trees.
photosynthesis is simple biology and chemistry that kids of 12 learn. if the planet/humanity is in as much peril as the alarmists say, wouldn`t it be a good place to start with schools etc planting stuff

 

[Oddball]

At least you've admitted you're completely clueless. Fair play

@Pretender17 - sorry i didn`t reply to all your other posts. i`m really warming to you but i can`t figure out why you want my attention so much. don`t get me wrong i`m not uncomfortable with it but the way you`re stalking me, its kind of like we`re in jail and you want to be my wife

 

[Prevenger17]

@Pretender17 - sorry i didn`t reply to all your other posts. i`m really warming to you but i can`t figure out why you want my attention so much. don`t get me wrong i`m not uncomfortable with it but its kind of like we`re in jail and you want to be my wife the way you`re stalking me.

I was genuinely just congratulating you on admitting that you were completely clueless mate, let's not turn it into another one of your weird screeds

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science

Background Among American Conservatives, but not Liberals, trust in science has been declining since the 1970's. Climate science has become particularly polarized, with Conservatives being more likely than Liberals to reject the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the globe...

journals.plos.org

 

[orchard]

1/ Plants absorb co2. - isn`t the simple answer to plant more trees instead of destroying millions of acres of woodland every year.
2/ tarmac absorbs the suns rays and it heats up. Plants absorb the suns rays and turn them into sugars/carbohydrates not heat.- isn`t the simple answer to stop tarmacing over everything and plant more trees.
photosynthesis is simple biology and chemistry that kids of 12 learn. if the planet/humanity is in as much peril as the alarmists say, wouldn`t it be a good place to start with schools etc planting stuff

Well, the problem's miniscule, so why bother eh mate. Besides, are you not uncomfortable restricting the freedoms of clear-fellers and tarmaccers?

Oh, and supposing someone bothers to check whether the trees are suitable, it takes ages until a tree starts sequestering sufficiently to replace the carbon that was released from the pasture in which it was planted. And then, before they're big enough to even do that, they may well die from drought or fire. Especially nowadays with all that tarmac. That's if, as you realise, they were actually planted and not just cooked up on someone's ledger.

 

[Prevenger17]

The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science

Background Among American Conservatives, but not Liberals, trust in science has been declining since the 1970's. Climate science has become particularly polarized, with Conservatives being more likely than Liberals to reject the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the globe...

journals.plos.org

The politicisation of it is the weirdest thing. The mental gymnastics people have been convinced to perform just to think it's some global liberal tax conspiracy is amazing work from oil and fossil fuel lobbyists, but not so good for the world unfortunately. I always imagine how weird it must be for scientists to do years of research, deliver their findings and then see their work dissected by random internet dweebs who have no qualifications and don't even possess a basic grasp of the scientific method.

 

[orchard]

The politicisation of it is the weirdest thing. The mental gymnastics people have been convinced to perform just to think it's some global liberal tax conspiracy is amazing work from oil and fossil fuel lobbyists, but not so good for the world unfortunately. I always imagine how weird it must be for scientists to do years of research, deliver their findings and then see their work dissected by random internet dweebs who have no qualifications and don't even possess a basic grasp of the scientific method.

Yeah, no idea where their ammo comes from mate.

Small company from Cornwall to oversee huge £70 billion Net Zero contract​

The Place Group will 'control, manage and deliver' the public sector transition to Net Zero

A company based in Cornwall has been given the job of overseeing a £70 billion contract to help deliver the country's transition to Net Zero - the target of completely negating the amount of greenhouse gases by reducing emissions. The Place Group - which is based at The Regent, Chapel Street, Penzance - has won the huge framework contract to "control, manage and deliver" the public sector transition to Net Zero.