What have these thousands of climate scientists actually DONE?

Tell us we need to stop using fossil fuels?

Isn't that rather like a fortune cooke that says "you will shortly be finishing your meal"?

We KNOW the oil is running out.

Any northen town will show you in the blackness of its stone that coal fives out a lot of smoke.

The weather is unpreedictable?

Well stack me in a corner!

I know they mean well and we need a few staring at coulds - but couldn't the rest be doing something USEFUL?

Working out how to irrigate deserts, or managing flood waters, or working on renewable fuels.

ANYTHING but jetting off round the world to conferences saying the oceans will rise by a foot in 100 years.

If you live by the sea - put shelves up.

REAL science tends to be useful.

Why do we think climate change is so important?

We should be focussing on the environmental changes that are definately caused by humans - of which there are many.

The consequences of these other environmental disasters have far deeper consequences for the human race.

Dont be blinded by the emissions coming out of politicians as they desparately try to divert our attention from the real worries.

Perhaps the evangalists for GW have an agenda.
Like more tax on everyone!
Good old BA are in the vanguard!
And politicians (even tories) will jump on any bandwagon if it looks like they will get votes from it.
My education covered global warming. How it had always happened (in between ice ages). How volcanic activity from Krakatoa changed the climate of the world for years. Much more drastically than WW1 WW2 and all the nuclear tests since then.
Our school motto was "Question everything". Today it seems to be "Question nothing as the politicians know best".
Well, they don`t, along with the climate change United Nations committee that first started the global warming scam.
Of course people should seek to conserve, but the politicians who preach the message are the same ones who want us to fund more roads and airports, along with bigger and better nuclear weapons. Who tax bigger cars because they do not drive, yet put in crackpot traffic management schemes that force all vehicles into a snails pace for miles.No thought for the pollution from that eh?
We are urged also to encourage our small children to walk to school hand in hand past the nose to tail traffic described above, because it is "good for them". Much better than being taken to school in one of those rotten 4X4s!
The world has gone mad!

How to talk condescendingly to a Climate Change Skeptic.

quote:

Originally posted by heujas:
This is a pretty comprehensive site answering all skeptical views on climate change. Also allows views from readers on the articles. Should answer any question skeptics have out there.

You need an Internet site in order to instruct you on telling people what 'you' believe. My word, we are looking dumbed down. I suppose that will be about as effective as taking someone to court using those DIY legal letters kits you can get from a stationary supplier. Even so, good luck with your new mental crutches.

You're beeing totally fooled people !
To say Co2 is causing global warming, is as crazy as saying that water is causing it.
Recently Lord David Rothschild was interviewed by Alex Jones who asked him "Why are Jupiter and Saturns moons turning from ice to liquid ?" to which Lord Rothschild answered, "Those planets are closer to the sun my friend" ! If you look at any science book or web page you will see this is a total lie. Some people may argue, well shouldn't we stop our "carbon footprint" just in case it is true ? Well that would be fine, if we were not in danger our being taxed for everything in the name of our "carbon footprint"

It's a shortcut and it will do people no good in the long run. If you want to learn about climate physics you are going to have to start at the beginning and I can confirm such things are hard graft for the mind. If you want to take the shortcut you are going to look a fake, and in this world too much is fake.

If I'm arguing something and get out of my depth I'm not going to pretend to know more than that person. Actually that did happen to me on one occasion when I was on a thread with a load of morons and all of a sudden this heavy-duty critic turned out to know his stuff, as in some sort of physics professor. He started to quote some serious mathematical theories that I had not come across that pretty much blew my argument. Fair play to the man, except he was not at all polite about it. That was not on global warming incidentally but the point is that nothing beats knowing your subject.

quote:

Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
It's a shortcut and it will do people no good in the long run. If you want to learn about climate physics you are going to have to start at the beginning and I can confirm such things are hard graft for the mind. If you want to take the shortcut you are going to look a fake, and in this world too much is fake.

The site is not a quick fix. It puts into perspective the arguements about man-made climate change. I have read the more in-depth articles but I'm not sure other people would, and I wouldn't blame them because there is a lot of literature out there.

Personally, I would rather see people shoot holes in that site rather than making climate change issue into a conspiracy.

quote:

Originally posted by youCANhandlethetruth:
You're beeing totally fooled people !
To say Co2 is causing global warming, is as crazy as saying that water is causing it.
Recently Lord David Rothschild was interviewed by Alex Jones who asked him "Why are Jupiter and Saturns moons turning from ice to liquid ?" to which Lord Rothschild answered, "Those planets are closer to the sun my friend" ! If you look at any science book or web page you will see this is a total lie. Some people may argue, well shouldn't we stop our "carbon footprint" just in case it is true ? Well that would be fine, if we were not in danger our being taxed for everything in the name of our "carbon footprint"

Huh, what has Lord Rothchild's opinion on moons got to do with man-made climate change??!!??

As for green taxation, that's a different issue. Don't shoot the messenger because you don't like the politics.

quote:

Originally posted by heujas:

quote:

Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
It's a shortcut and it will do people no good in the long run. If you want to learn about climate physics you are going to have to start at the beginning and I can confirm such things are hard graft for the mind. If you want to take the shortcut you are going to look a fake, and in this world too much is fake.

The site is not a quick fix. It puts into perspective the arguements about man-made climate change. I have read the more in-depth articles but I'm not sure other people would, and I wouldn't blame them because there is a lot of literature out there.

Personally, I would rather see people shoot holes in that site rather than making climate change issue into a conspiracy.

Even so I personally find a lot of the 'debates' tiresome when people are just quoting what other people have said at each other. I get it a lot and when I try and explain to someone why something is not correct it's as though they frantically try to search for an answer to my points but can't quite refine the Google search enough, so they say something that is entirely nothing to do with the point raised.

It's virtually impossible to learn a subject from a politician. Say you wanted to understand economic theory and you watch all the economic debates. You would still have no clue about it, and I can testify to this myself, I didn't have a clue about it for years until I got the textbooks out.

quote:

Originally posted by Bioethanol:

quote:

Originally posted by duffle:
Who wants to ban cars?

ken livingstone?

£25 a day congestion charge for big cars?

One of his few sensible ideas. My mother had three kids and managed quite happily in a tiny little 3 door Nissan Cherry. Nobody living in cities needs big cars. Even putting aside the environemtnal impact big cars use up more precious oil than small cars.

quote:

Originally posted by heujas:

quote:

Originally posted by Strange_Nerd:
I find it funny that when it's hot it's "Global Warming" and when it's cold it's "Climate Change".

Err no, most people apply the terms properly. It's only you who doesn't understand.

quote:

And anyway, I don't belive turning off your TV will save the world when you have countries like China and America pumping billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the air everyday with huge factories.

And to add to that... why should we reduce our standard of living until them poor Africans reduce theirs even further.

OK, I completely agree with you that I'm a stupid idiot, and I don't understand much of what you said, but here, have a virtual cookie.

quote:

Originally posted by Ewellguy:

quote:

Originally posted by Bioethanol:

quote:

Originally posted by duffle:
Who wants to ban cars?

ken livingstone?

£25 a day congestion charge for big cars?

One of his few sensible ideas. My mother had three kids and managed quite happily in a tiny little 3 door Nissan Cherry. Nobody living in cities needs big cars. Even putting aside the environemtnal impact big cars use up more precious oil than small cars.

Well said, used to live in the countryside (edge of pennines). People there managed to drive up dirt farm roads in a simple front wheel drives.

Why anybody needs a 4x4 in the city is beyond me.

Unfortunately the wrods, "want," and, "need," have now become interchangeable in many peoples' minds.

It's how people define themselves. Rather than aiming to be a nice person or to be respected for what that person stands for, they instead think they can get admiration by the sort of car they drive and the cloths they wear. Then to bolster their personality even more than that they pick and choose to sign up to 'good causes' without even the ability to understand which are genuinely good and which are scams.

Such is life in the boring office but you know all this money spent on looking like someone is paid for out of mind numbingly boring office work. So who has the last laugh there then? Check the accounts of these good causes; global warming propaganda is dished out via billions of pounds of funding.

Some people just like driving.

Big 4x4s in cities are excessive - but even a range rover produces a smaller greenhouse effect than a cow.

and cows outnumber cars 5:1

i wish more of these gw scientists were being to do USEFUL science.

We know the oil is running out (our greatest challenge) - so lets see some boffins working on the replacemnent.

quote:

Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
So who has the last laugh there then? Check the accounts of these good causes; global warming propaganda is dished out via billions of pounds of funding.

Before you accuse the AGW theory of having an agenda. Perhaps you should look at the rubbish the skeptics have been spewing out. So far, these are the reasons skeptics give...

1. Global warming is caused by volcanoes - emissions from volcanic activity is only a 10th of human activity

2. Global warming is a cyclical event - good, in that case we should be going through a cooling period, not a warming period

3. Global warming is due to sun's irradiance - good theory except sun's irradiance has been declining in the last 25 years

4. Global warming stopped in 1998 - no the trend is still going up. 1998 was an anomaly.

Have me old eyes become skpecticle or is there no linkee that my eyes could 'ave ever have detected.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveCH:
Have me old eyes become skpecticle or is there no linkee that my eyes could 'ave ever have detected.

4th time I've posted it, but here goes

link

quote:

Originally posted by Bioethanol:
i wish more of these gw scientists were being to do USEFUL science.

We know the oil is running out (our greatest challenge) - so lets see some boffins working on the replacemnent.

Don't you think identifying the causes of global warming is useful science. Or is it 'useless' science because what they are saying is what we don't want to hear...

quote:

Originally posted by heujas:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveCH:
Have me old eyes become skpecticle or is there no linkee that my eyes could 'ave ever have detected.

4th time I've posted it, but here goes

link

This is the cloud effect I spoke of the other day, post a whole load of clouds that require lots of reading in the way and it cools the criticism. When you have to resort to this you know you have lost. It's just not science old boy.

quote:

Originally posted by heujas:

quote:

Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
So who has the last laugh there then? Check the accounts of these good causes; global warming propaganda is dished out via billions of pounds of funding.

Before you accuse the AGW theory of having an agenda. Perhaps you should look at the rubbish the skeptics have been spewing out. So far, these are the reasons skeptics give...

1. Global warming is caused by volcanoes - emissions from volcanic activity is only a 10th of human activity

2. Global warming is a cyclical event - good, in that case we should be going through a cooling period, not a warming period

3. Global warming is due to sun's irradiance - good theory except sun's irradiance has been declining in the last 25 years

4. Global warming stopped in 1998 - no the trend is still going up. 1998 was an anomaly.

If you think I'm the sort of person who aligns one's self to any artificial group construct then you have got me entirely wrong. I don't care what others have been purported to have said, what is important to me is what I say and the accuracy of it. If my views happen to coincide with others then I'm happy at that but if the other views veer off into a direction that I don't accept then I will not adjust my view accordingly.

I used to enjoy the odd festival which has later on turned into events that are total GW propaganda machines when initially they were more about looking after our environment, like keeping rivers free from toxic industrial effluent and that sort of thing. Unlike the majority of sheep I didn't continue with it when the goal posts were moved, I investigated why the goal posts had been moved and I suppose I'm a bit out on a limb with most people in that I believe it is primarily for the purpose of de-industrialisation. I await for the rest to catch up!

quote:

Originally posted by DaveCH:
This is the cloud effect I spoke of the other day, post a whole load of clouds that require lots of reading in the way and it cools the criticism. When you have to resort to this you know you have lost. It's just not science old boy.

Sorry, remind of what you posted? It was a little while ago.

Resort to what? Have you even looked at the page let alone read any of it?