Jump to content

Greta Thunberg & Extinction Rebellion


Rev

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 592
  • Created
  • Last Reply
55 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

I didn’t say swallow it because was on Facebook. If I posted the world was round on Facebook then, you would dismiss it?

All I am saying is don’t make assumptions on Curry just because, someone, mentioned her name in a Facebook post. That would just be stupidity..

Wouldn't dream of it. My point was that this was posted on here seemingly as a statement of fact and that it was simply a facebook post and unworthy of such status. As anyone who wants to check will know, the Facebook post contained a number of inaccuracies. But it was put on Facebook for people who don't check, as evidenced by its posting on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dog said:

Is Judith Curry the one who refuses to publish in peer reviewed journals?

Wonder why not

Dunno, but Wikipedia suggests not.

Curry is the co-author of Thermodynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans (1999), and co-editor of Encyclopedia of Atmospheric Sciences (2002). Curry has published over 130 scientific peer reviewed papers. Among her awards is the Henry G. Hughton Research Award from the American Meteorological Society in 1992.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dog said:

Is Judith Curry the one who refuses to publish in peer reviewed journals?

Wonder why not

She has stated that she no longer intends to publish in peer reviewed journals but she has been published widely in those periodicals in the past.  So, there is no doubting her credentials as a climate scientist really.  However, although she does indeed believe that the Earth will warm due to human activity she is out of step with the vast majority of her colleagues about the extent of that warming or our ability to accurately predict the scale of that warming in any meaningful way.

The situation for climate skeptics is getting quite desperate when the climate scientist they cherry pick to support their claims is still one who actually believes that humans will cause the planet to warm. 

The dishonesty of the post on facebook is staggering.  If there is one group of people who believe in Greta Thunberg's message more than any other, it is the professional climate scientists.  Yet the post on Facebook was attempting to suggest that Greta's point of view is out of step with educated opinion on the subject. 

That's the world we live in now, it seems.  Lie and misinform as much as you can and as loudly as you can.  Unfortunately, it works to a large extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Highgate said:

She has stated that she no longer intends to publish in peer reviewed journals but she has been published widely in those periodicals in the past.  So, there is no doubting her credentials as a climate scientist really.  However, although she does indeed believe that the Earth will warm due to human activity she is out of step with the vast majority of her colleagues about the extent of that warming or our ability to accurately predict the scale of that warming in any meaningful way.

The situation for climate skeptics is getting quite desperate when the climate scientist they cherry pick to support their claims is still one who actually believes that humans will cause the planet to warm. 

The dishonesty of the post on facebook is staggering.  If there is one group of people who believe in Greta Thunberg's message more than any other, it is the professional climate scientists.  Yet the post on Facebook was attempting to suggest that Greta's point of view is out of step with educated opinion on the subject. 

That's the world we live in now, it seems.  Lie and misinform as much as you can and as loudly as you can.  Unfortunately, it works to a large extent.

I think the issue is just how bad are things. Is it really irreversible in 10 years? How do they know that? You yourself questioned climate models in a previous post but is that not exactly what all these doom merchants are making big claims on? How many times in the last have the so called experts, cocked up predictions in the past? I am certainly no expert and am on the fence with the whole thing. The effects of fossil fuel use.. Would they really have that effect in what is a heart beat in time? 
We seem to be on a argument of extremes again. It seems to me, most of the arguments have a valid counter argument. I personally  don’t believe it as bad as some would have us believe but it’s difficult to find decent stuff that does not have a huge bias with one opinion or another.. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

I think the issue is just how bad are things. Is it really irreversible in 10 years? How do they know that? You yourself questioned climate models in a previous post but is that not exactly what all these doom merchants are making big claims on?

Not really mate. The issue is are we doing serious damage to the environment? If folk choose to ignore that in favour of pouring scorn on the predicted timelines, that's their call and their prerogative but most often if just comes across as a reason to ignore the issue completely. If I had a persistent cough and the doctor sent me for xrays and there were possibly ominous shadows on my lungs, I'm not going to ignore him because I don't like the prognosis and instead maintain my stogie intake. Makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Not really mate. The issue is are we doing serious damage to the environment? If folk choose to ignore that in favour of pouring scorn on the predicted timelines, that's their call and their prerogative but most often if just comes across as a reason to ignore the issue completely. If I had a persistent cough and the doctor sent me for xrays and there were possibly ominous shadows on my lungs, I'm not going to ignore him because I don't like the prognosis and instead maintain my stogie intake. Makes no sense.

But ultimately they don’t help their argument with way off predictions though. I don’t think anyone would like a cleaner greener lifestyle but is there the science to provide it? 
I don’t deny man has an effect but how big is that effect. If that doctor keeps telling you, you have 3 months to live and your still here 3 years later, you are going to lose confidence in that doctor..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Angry Ram said:

I think the issue is just how bad are things. Is it really irreversible in 10 years? How do they know that? You yourself questioned climate models in a previous post but is that not exactly what all these doom merchants are making big claims on? How many times in the last have the so called experts, cocked up predictions in the past? I am certainly no expert and am on the fence with the whole thing. The effects of fossil fuel use.. Would they really have that effect in what is a heart beat in time? 
We seem to be on a argument of extremes again. It seems to me, most of the arguments have a valid counter argument. I personally  don’t believe it as bad as some would have us believe but it’s difficult to find decent stuff that does not have a huge bias with one opinion or another..

When predicting the future it's always difficult to be precise.  The more complicated the system, the greater the difficulty.  And the planet's climate is very complicated.  Countless interactions between the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and even lithosphere mean that any predictions about our future climate have to come with substantial margins of error attached.

The current situation is this. Scientists understand clearly what should happen to our climate. We know the physical properties of greenhouse gases and we are aware that we are increasing their quantity in the atmosphere.  And we know that because of their alarmingly rapid increase that the subsequent increase in temperature should also be extremely rapid on a geological timescale.  For a climate scientist to state that humans are warming up the planet, the rate of the warming will be rapid and it's extent will be severe (if nothing is done) is not anyone being a doom merchant, it's simply someone doing their job and telling you the facts as they are known.  And they are well known.  This much is simple and straightforward.

Predicting the precise extent and rate of the inevitable warming is a different matter.  It's very difficult, the exact values of each of the parameters aren't known and even some of the aforementioned interactions are not fully understood at present.  That's why climate models are just very educated guesswork at the moment,  But they have been shown to work very well, both in the short term and in the longer term.  Those that don't work well are discarded.  I share a little of your skepticism (only a little) regarding climate models and I do feel that many of the time scales involved are unrealistically precise.  However I don't know whether those timelines are pessimistic or, in fact, optimistic. 

All our scientific knowledge tells us that Global Warming will be rapid, severe and damaging, unless there is something that the climate scientists as yet don't understand about our climate, that might mitigate it's worst effects ( who wants to take that gamble?). Just because we don't know precisely how Global Warming will play out does not mean we should dismiss it.  The time for fence sitting has long since past in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

But ultimately they don’t help their argument with way off predictions though. I don’t think anyone would like a cleaner greener lifestyle but is there the science to provide it? 
I don’t deny man has an effect but how big is that effect. If that doctor keeps telling you, you have 3 months to live and your still here 3 years later, you are going to lose confidence in that doctor..

That assumes you know the predictions are way off buddy. Do you and if so on what basis? I'm assuming you also meant that everyone would prefer a greener lifestyle too? 

And if you turned out to have cancer but lived longer than forecast, I'd be grateful for catching the disease early not grumpy over the prognosis!!! I really don't understand your logic but you don't want to accept the bulk of climate scientists theses, for whatever reason, so I doubt anything I can say will change your thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

That assumes you know the predictions are way off buddy. Do you and if so on what basis? I'm assuming you also meant that everyone would prefer a greener lifestyle too? 

And if you turned out to have cancer but lived longer than forecast, I'd be grateful for catching the disease early not grumpy over the prognosis!!! I really don't understand your logic but you don't want to accept the bulk of climate scientists theses, for whatever reason, so I doubt anything I can say will change your thinking.

Historically they have been haven’t they? Climate mouth pieces like Gore have continually spouted mis information that has not helped the climate cause. That’s why there is such distrust of some things now.

Yes I am sure everyone wants a greener lifestyle. We certainly recycle more as a family and now we don’t buy stuff that uses single use plastics where possible. Environmentally those issues cause me more concern. 

Listen I readily admit I don’t know enough about it.. Highgate posts NASA links but what the duck do they mean in real terms?

There have been some interesting points in this thread. Once we get past the name calling and dissing of others opinions it’s an interesting read on both sides..

All I want is the truth, nothing sensationalised but where do you get that in laymen’s terms? All too quickly people dismiss this or that expert for this or this or that reason.. Even on this thread Andy shut down Curry because someone mentioned her name on Facebook.. What the duck is that all about? I don’t know Curry but how much stall do we take with her opinion or another’s opinion who differs? Surely she should be listened to and then her opinion challenged?

I guess that is the problem. It all depends on opinion and as Highgate says predictions are difficult and almost impossible.. 

All too often, bit like Brexit, when you try and have a sensible discussion about these things, the pompous self righteous oratory comes to the fore.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Angry Ram said:

I guess that is the problem. It all depends on opinion and as Highgate says predictions are difficult and almost impossible.. 

All too often, bit like Brexit, when you try and have a sensible discussion about these things, the pompous self righteous oratory comes to the fore.

I did say predictions are difficult....but what I meant was it's difficult to make precise predictions with definitive timelines.  Climate models are very useful, and will only get better and better.

However my general point was that there should be no more need for debate about the fact that humans are warming up the planet and it's going to have dire consequences for us all.  The only debate left is about the details. how bad will it be exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Historically they have been haven’t they? Climate mouth pieces like Gore have continually spouted mis information that has not helped the climate cause. That’s why there is such distrust of some things now.

Yes I am sure everyone wants a greener lifestyle. We certainly recycle more as a family and now we don’t buy stuff that uses single use plastics where possible. Environmentally those issues cause me more concern. 

Listen I readily admit I don’t know enough about it.. Highgate posts NASA links but what the duck do they mean in real terms?

There have been some interesting points in this thread. Once we get past the name calling and dissing of others opinions it’s an interesting read on both sides..

All I want is the truth, nothing sensationalised but where do you get that in laymen’s terms? All too quickly people dismiss this or that expert for this or this or that reason.. Even on this thread Andy shut down Curry because someone mentioned her name on Facebook.. What the duck is that all about? I don’t know Curry but how much stall do we take with her opinion or another’s opinion who differs? Surely she should be listened to and then her opinion challenged?

I guess that is the problem. It all depends on opinion and as Highgate says predictions are difficult and almost impossible.. 

All too often, bit like Brexit, when you try and have a sensible discussion about these things, the pompous self righteous oratory comes to the fore.

 

Which is why I choose to believe what I want, the fear around brexit was breathtaking, politicians, think banks, finance polls, the duckin governor of the Bank of England all predicted doom and gloom, all wrong, all lying bar stewards in it for themselves.......it’s all just ******** to get more money in taxes or any other means to line someone else’s pocket, I did a damn good job of recycling for a while, until my red bin (cardboard) wasn’t emptied due to there being a takeaway pizza box in there, after enquiring to the council they explained it contained food waste and should have been put in black bin....I poo you not my recycling days were done, I put what I want in whatever bin I want, duck ya council tax, and duck the hitler twit dustman 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Historically they have been haven’t they? Climate mouth pieces like Gore have continually spouted mis information that has not helped the climate cause. That’s why there is such distrust of some things now.

Yes I am sure everyone wants a greener lifestyle. We certainly recycle more as a family and now we don’t buy stuff that uses single use plastics where possible. Environmentally those issues cause me more concern. 

Listen I readily admit I don’t know enough about it.. Highgate posts NASA links but what the duck do they mean in real terms?

There have been some interesting points in this thread. Once we get past the name calling and dissing of others opinions it’s an interesting read on both sides..

All I want is the truth, nothing sensationalised but where do you get that in laymen’s terms? All too quickly people dismiss this or that expert for this or this or that reason.. Even on this thread Andy shut down Curry because someone mentioned her name on Facebook.. What the duck is that all about? I don’t know Curry but how much stall do we take with her opinion or another’s opinion who differs? Surely she should be listened to and then her opinion challenged?

I guess that is the problem. It all depends on opinion and as Highgate says predictions are difficult and almost impossible.. 

All too often, bit like Brexit, when you try and have a sensible discussion about these things, the pompous self righteous oratory comes to the fore.

 

I think we're actually closer to agreement than you think. You'll not find a single post from me stating that the tipping point projections should be taken as gospel, quite the opposite in fact. I've spent a deal of the last 10 years working in the renewables space yet my understanding of the climate science data and the projections derived from those studies is at best rudimentary and at worst something rather less. That said, I'm more inclined to believe they might be accurate than not, if only because of the sheer weight of scientific opinion supporting the former. It also seems to me to be far more logical to prepare for the worst and hope for the best where the health of our planet is concerned.

Frankly, I myself don't want to believe the climate scientists are right. I'd sleep easier 'knowing' they are not for sure, but I'm not dismissing their opinions either nor calling their research a hoax or agenda-laden as I have literally no zero evidence to support either claim and critically, nor have I seen anyone else show they do either.

Also, whilst I agree that it's difficult at times to have an adult conversation on here, let's not pretend that it's only one side shouting down the other. It's absolutely not the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Barnetbyram said:

Which is why I choose to believe what I want, the fear around brexit was breathtaking, politicians, think banks, finance polls, the duckin governor of the Bank of England all predicted doom and gloom, all wrong, all lying bar stewards in it for themselves.......it’s all just ******** to get more money in taxes or any other means to line someone else’s pocket, I did a damn good job of recycling for a while, until my red bin (cardboard) wasn’t emptied due to there being a takeaway pizza box in there, after enquiring to the council they explained it contained food waste and should have been put in black bin....I poo you not my recycling days were done, I put what I want in whatever bin I want, duck ya council tax, and duck the hitler rick dustman 

@Highgate - you really need to work on those memes quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when we worried about the ozone layer? When industries had to stop putting CFCs in aerosols and other stuff?

It worked. In 2005, almost 20 years after the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, we got the first proof that ozone layer depletion was slowing. Then in 2018 the UN announced that the ozone layer is actually healing. At projected rates, the hole we blew in the earth’s natural sunscreen is scheduled to heal completely by 2030 in the northern hemisphere and mid-latitudes, by 2050 in the southern hemisphere and by 2060 at the poles. 

 

So when it comes to global warming (and by that I mean man-made activities which are artificially accelerating the heating of the planet) - don't let anyone try and tell you it's too late.  What is wrong with people who look for excuses and not actions? This is all in our hands

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/01/2020 at 17:44, Barnetbyram said:

Which is why I choose to believe what I want, the fear around brexit was breathtaking, politicians, think banks, finance polls, the duckin governor of the Bank of England all predicted doom and gloom, all wrong, all lying bar stewards in it for themselves.......it’s all just ******** to get more money in taxes or any other means to line someone else’s pocket, I did a damn good job of recycling for a while, until my red bin (cardboard) wasn’t emptied due to there being a takeaway pizza box in there, after enquiring to the council they explained it contained food waste and should have been put in black bin....I poo you not my recycling days were done, I put what I want in whatever bin I want, duck ya council tax, and duck the hitler twit dustman 

I missed this poster's arrival on here. Please tell me this is quite brilliant satire?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the climate is changing and of course 7 billion of us pouring out garbage and pollutants is the major cause. 
 

That said, I am left thinking that the eco industry and climate activists have amidst their numbers a whole bunch of con men, airheads and ideologues .. and some very good scientists and sincere people too. 
 

Our houses don’t burn down because we have PVC coated wiring that doesn’t decay. Coal fired power stations emit dangerous gases but also keep millions warm, fridges cold and the lights on. Those nasty oil companies make chemicals and products that save lives. We need a degree of pragmatism when discussing industrial cause and effects. It isn’t simple. 
 

and regardless of the fact that this time round it is man that is the major effect; the climate has always changed. The question we have to ask is what can we do to ensure it remains within limits for us to survive. And with 7 billion versus the 2.5 billion that were around when I was born, reducing our personal part of the emissions by a certain percentage is always going to be overwhelmed by population growth over time. 
 

I just try not to waste too much, put stuff in the right bin, mend things, save things but at a certain point without some genuine scientific breakthrough in material and energy creation there is only so much we can do. 
 

defo need plastics that really do rot oh, and and the Severn barrage would be a good start. 
 

that’s my two penny worth ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...