Climate change is fake [mod warning - controversial topic - enter at your own risk]

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Ken H, 6 May 2019.

  1. CanalWalker

    CanalWalker Member

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    13 May 2019

    And the moon landings were faked and 7/11 was a CIA plot.
    Politicians do listen to physicists and 99% of them agree with the 16 year old girl. Google IPPC.
     
  2. bb21

    bb21 Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    23,171
    Joined:
    4 Feb 2010
    Reminder that while everyone is entitled to their own opinion, please also note views may be robustly challenged and you may have to be prepared to justify your claims with impartial evidence. Robust challenges are hallmarks of a healthy and active debate.

    Reports about such challenges will therefore be rejected in the context of forum moderation unless they break forum rules.
     
  3. Starmill

    Starmill Events Co-ordinator

    Messages:
    12,487
    Joined:
    18 May 2012
    Location:
    Manchester
    Personally I'm just disappointed that we're still at the stage of having to convince the tiny percentage of people who remain unconvinced by the overwhelming mass of highly convincing evidence that has already been presented, that climate change is both real and also caused by human activity.

    It'd be convenient if those weren't true. But they are. It's a difficult and painful reality, I acknowledge. But we are all better off for accepting the best evidence as it stands at the moment.
     
  4. E100

    E100 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    29 Apr 2018
    The evidence cited on solar forcing has been countered numerous times on the issue of cause and effect. Whilst there will always be the occasional paper to the contrary the overwhelming body of evidence is against this interpretation of the paper. I say interpretation as the paper doesn't actually say anything about the impact upon the future climate is, though many journalists have used this to attack climate science by extrapolating what is said...
     
  5. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,606
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Here's my own conspiracy theory (that I just invented). Three of those four sound like they are Russian, so this is obviously another attempt by a foreign power to undermine British society. I note also that the link to the evidence has mysteriously disappeared.
     
  6. MisterT

    MisterT Member

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2014
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I'll just drop a link here (it's a large image), but it's a nice (comic) visualisation of the average temperature of the earth since the last ice age: https://xkcd.com/1732/
     
  7. mafeu

    mafeu Member

    Messages:
    46
    Joined:
    20 Mar 2014
    If you say so.

    I’ve always wondered why climate change hasn’t been used to justify higher taxes. E.g. significant increase on petrol duty that could be directed towards investment in public transport infrastructure, in turn driving motorists towards using improved greener transport links

     
  8. Groningen

    Groningen Established Member

    Messages:
    2,849
    Joined:
    14 Jan 2015
    Problem is that if things go wrong or not we all will be dead.
     
  9. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    37,062
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    That's a good visualisation.

    One point that I think people on both sides miss is that climate change can of course be caused by more than one thing - both humans and naturally. The thing those who push the issue being natural miss is that it is still a problem. This being the case, even if it is natural we need to look for ways to reduce it, which might well mean that even the emissions of 1900 (say) are not acceptable - we have to go much lower.
     
  10. Mag_seven

    Mag_seven Established Member

    Messages:
    4,381
    Joined:
    1 Sep 2014
    Location:
    here to eternity
    As if governments needed justifications for tax rises.
     
  11. FelixtheCat

    FelixtheCat Established Member

    Messages:
    2,354
    Joined:
    23 Jul 2015
    Location:
    Edinburgh, London, or somewhere else
    I thought this was going to be a reasonable debate. Then I see this in the opening post:

    "its a scam by academics, paid by governments, to make conclusions, which the government can then use to justify tax increases."

    Oh dear.
     
  12. Mag_seven

    Mag_seven Established Member

    Messages:
    4,381
    Joined:
    1 Sep 2014
    Location:
    here to eternity
    Even of that is the case, that does not mean that human activity does not affect the climate.
     
  13. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    37,062
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Exactly. And it might be that by significantly reducing emissions we can offset that effect.
     
  14. WelshBluebird

    WelshBluebird Established Member

    Messages:
    3,049
    Joined:
    14 Jan 2010
    Just because someone is a professor, does not mean they are also experts and should be trusted about anything outside their field. Indeed there is a fairly well recognised pattern that the more specialised in one area someone becomes, the less knowledgeable in other areas they also become.

    In this case, the cited professor is actually a professors of Mathematics and nothing at all to do with the climate, weather, chemistry, biology or anything that would indicate any expertise in climate science. Indeed by their own admission, their interests and expertise lie in Maths, applied Maths, Astronomy and Astrophysics. The only area that would have any relevance is the Astronomy and Astrophysics areas in terms of how the sun behaves, but that says literally nothing about how the atmosphere and Climate behave.

    The idea that just because someone is an expert in something then they must also be an expert in all sorts of other things is a very dangerous one.
     
  15. JohnMcL7

    JohnMcL7 Member

    Messages:
    205
    Joined:
    18 Apr 2018
    You are of course correct and of all the explanations I've seen, I've always thought this xkcd image showing temperature and time shows just how drastic the change in heat is compared to previous natural warming and cooling:

    https://xkcd.com/1732/
     
  16. DarloRich

    DarloRich Veteran Member

    Messages:
    20,770
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2010
    Location:
    Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
    Comedy gold. I wonder if you have actually read the paper

    you haven't offered one...........................

    Quite.

    Pure kippernomics
     
    Last edited: 15 May 2019
  17. E100

    E100 Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    29 Apr 2018
    Please note my above post that OP point is largely hogwash. From someone who, whilst I wouldn't claim to be an expert, did study some climate science at a masters level, mathematicians do play a crucial role in climate science, so would at least want to defend their honour in this field. I think you could be on to a good point that we should expect at least one of the authors to be more of peer-reviewed expert in climate science if they were making such a claim. From what I have seen, the paper has actually been grossly misinterpreted by the OP and media and was hijacked by climate skeptics and doesn't directly claim what the OP claims the paper does. The only claim actually made was that 'based on observed statistics and in turn used to build a model it is anticipated that sunspot activity will decrease' with no mention of climate in the paper, let alone the impact upon climate change science. Just another example of fake news...
     
  18. EM2

    EM2 Established Member

    Messages:
    7,128
    Joined:
    16 Nov 2008
    Location:
    The home of the concrete cow
    I'm reminded of this cartoon:
    [​IMG]
    Banner reads CLIMATE SUMMIT
    Screen reads
    • ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
    • PRESERVE RAINFORESTS
    • SUSTAINABILITY
    • GREEN JOBS
    • LIVABLE (sic) CITIES
    • RENEWABLES
    • CLEAN WATER, AIR
    • HEALTHY CHILDREN
    • etc. etc.
    An audience member shouts 'What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?'
     
  19. NoMorePacers

    NoMorePacers Member

    Messages:
    385
    Joined:
    18 Feb 2016
    Location:
    Hull
    To be honest, although I am aware that climate change is happening, and I do think that we should act to make our planet better (and being able to breathe cleaner air is nice as well), I do feel it has been a tiny bit exaggerated by people (I doubt that the Earth is going to die in 10 years). Also it doesn’t help that the timescale for when we “need to save the planet” keeps changing. I’ve seen it go from 12 years, to less than 10 years, to something like 5 years in about a month.

    Although it’s worth pointing out that there are plenty of both climate fanatics and climate deniers who are insufferable pricks. As with pretty much everything.
     
  20. 433N

    433N Member

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    20 Jun 2017
    Quite. CO2 is now over 400 ppm whereas maximum scale is 300 ppm on the graphs shown ... i.e. we are now off scale by 30%.

    You have to remember that to publish, as these 4 are, you have to say something new - although quite what there is left to say about climatic variations with the solar cycle is beyond me. Do we have a link to the original article ? (Don't worry, I'm sure I'll be able to cope). Strangely Prof Valentina Zharkova does not cite it as one of her key publications nor as one of her ''Research Themes and Scholarly Interests" (and I can't be bothered to look out everyone else)
     
  21. cactustwirly

    cactustwirly Established Member

    Messages:
    4,250
    Joined:
    10 Apr 2013
    Location:
    The Midlands
    Those graphs are completely meaningless without context
     
  22. Arctic Troll

    Arctic Troll Established Member

    Messages:
    9,261
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Newcastle upon Tyne
    We should tell them tjat global warming will reduce the availability of gammon.
     
  23. ainsworth74

    ainsworth74 Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    19,608
    Joined:
    16 Nov 2009
    Location:
    Redcar
    And that's kinda where I've landed on the whole thing really. Climate change is definitely happening and it's probably being influenced either to a greater or lesser extent by human activity. But, from my point of view, even if I were to come down on the side of human activity playing a very small role on climate change why not take the measures described that would attempt to limit the damage? Because just as that cartoon suggests those goals are surely huge positives so who cares if it turns out the science is wrong!? For instance why not try and move towards better public transport and wider adoptions of electric vehicles? Even if the emissions from mass car ownership aren't causing climate change they're still at least harming peoples health and at worst killing them (or shortening their life expectancy). So reducing car ownership and transitioning to electric vehicles is surely still a positive worth striving for?
     
  24. rdeez

    rdeez Member

    Messages:
    351
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2013
    I honestly can't believe that in 2019 this is even a topic of debate, it really is absurd. The evidence is overwhelming. A handful of scientists suggesting otherwise is the climate equivalent of flat earthers.

    More than that, even if you are a climate sceptic, many of the solutions to climate change are also solutions to the other big problems facing our planet - we're cutting down rainforests at an alarming rate, and as well as being important carbon sinks, rainforests are also host to thousands of unique species of life and plants.

    Fossil fuels aren't just bad for the environment, they're also finite resources, so alternatives are needed regardless. If we stop using them for non-essential purposes sooner (generating electricity, filling our cars) we'll have longer to keep using them for applications where alternatives are hard to come by.

    Emissions from vehicles and industry are causing real health issues in our cities, putting people at risk of respiratory conditions and cancers. We need to cut them down to save lives and healthcare expenses, never mind the planet as a whole.

    Deny that we're causing climate change if you want to, but we still need to take action for many other reasons.
     
  25. Royston Vasey

    Royston Vasey Established Member

    Messages:
    1,420
    Joined:
    14 May 2008
    Location:
    Cambridge
    The climate is changing. The rate of that is relatively fast but far from unprecedented. The chances are we’ve probably had something to do with some part of that.

    But that said, I do wonder if in a couple of hundred years our contemporary science is considered/proven to be as defective as we now see, say, the treatment of various ailments with leeches for “bad blood”.

    We must never consider contemporary science to be the pinnacle and ultimate understanding of anything, because it’s never been the case through human development and there is no reason to believe it’s the case now. And I am a scientist.

    But it’s our best guess right now, which is all science ever is, based on sound evidence and experiment.
     
  26. rdeez

    rdeez Member

    Messages:
    351
    Joined:
    7 Apr 2013
    That's a non-argument. Leeches in medicine were never based on science. They didn't conduct decades of measurements and surveys, didn't have their work peer reviewed, etc.
     
  27. edwin_m

    edwin_m Veteran Member

    Messages:
    14,606
    Joined:
    21 Apr 2013
    Location:
    Nottingham
    In fact leeches (farmed in sterile conditions) are still used in some fields of modern medicine.
     
  28. nlogax

    nlogax Member

    Messages:
    927
    Joined:
    29 May 2011
    Christ on an effing bike. Going by this my guess is we're only a few months away from an 'Earth is flat' thread.
     
  29. mac

    mac Member

    Messages:
    415
    Joined:
    15 Dec 2010
    I do think that there's a lot of unanswered questions concerning all this, first it was global warming until we had a couple of cold winters then it became climate change, who is paying all the people who say it's due to humans? I agree something is happening 50 years ago I worked on a farm and needed wet weather gear on most days in the winter as far as I remember it's rained 1 day this year, but then nobody will say why the ice melted 10000 years ago when man didn't have anything to do with it. We get told people are dying due to pollution but how many would die from having no heating. We get told our cars are killing us but my diesel has exhausts just as clean as the day I bought it 3 years ago where 10 years ago they wasn't.
     
  30. nlogax

    nlogax Member

    Messages:
    927
    Joined:
    29 May 2011
    Both terms are valid, but subtly different.

    Global warming = average global temperature rising due to increased greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere
    Climate change = the change of climate patterns and events (storms, droughts, etc) over time

    In the throes of climate change, local weather systems and patterns may become more extreme - again, over time. It's a common mistake to tie in a cold winter as 'proof that global warming doesn't exist / is a hoax'. Look at the historical trends. Exactly how often are you seeing those cold winters now?
     
  31. Royston Vasey

    Royston Vasey Established Member

    Messages:
    1,420
    Joined:
    14 May 2008
    Location:
    Cambridge
    You’re picking on the wrong part of the argument. Understanding of science has never stopped evolving and never will. A lot can change and be discovered in centuries based on better understanding and better experimentation. I’m not a climate change denier, but I’m a rational scientist. It would be silly to assume we already understand everything about our vast planet and its mechanisms.
     

Share This Page