25 Years of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’.

[AronSearle]

It's more scientifically based than that. I don't really understand it

Don't let that stop you acting smug and disagreeing though.

But I saw it on a science program

Oh, you saw it on TV, why not do some reading then?

Plenty of sources explaining the flaws in the theory, (both its validity and discussing how the predicted effects are overblown).

It may be true, but it is not a proven theory as much as Co2 causing some warming is.

 

[sooey]

Don't let that stop you acting smug and disagreeing though.
.

Coming from you that is priceless.

It may be true, but it is not a proven theory as much as Co2 causing some warming is

I already intimated at this but fyi there is no such thing as a proven scientific theory. Now, you stop acting smug and disagreeing about stuff you have no clue about.

 

[Brigadier]

For me, it's less about climate change per se, and more about being more considerate and responsible, and less wasteful.
if some need the prod from a stick called "climate change" and that achieves less waste, fair play. But keep in mind that (as with most things these days), the average Joe is making the few exceedingly rich, on the pretext of "climate change".

 

[Gasman77]

For me, it's less about climate change per se, and more about being more considerate and responsible, and less wasteful.
if some need the prod from a stick called "climate change" and that achieves less waste, fair play. But keep in mind that (as with most things these days), the average Joe is making the few exceedingly rich, on the pretext of "climate change".

Out of interest, who are the few that are getting rich from climate change?

 

[AronSearle]

Coming from you that is priceless.

My advice typically is.

but fyi there is no such thing as a proven scientific theory.

There is a scale.

Aliens visited ancient earth is a theory, so is evolution.

That co2 causes warming (not how much) is on the evolution side of the scale, the gulf stream collapse theory is not, but any scare story regarding climate change is presented as proven theory.

Now, you stop acting smug and disagreeing about stuff you have no clue about.

Maybe I should watch more TV like you?

 

[Brigadier]

For me, it's less about climate change per se, and more about being more considerate and responsible, and less wasteful.
if some need the prod from a stick called "climate change" and that achieves less waste, fair play. But keep in mind that (as with most things these days), the average Joe is making the few exceedingly rich, on the pretext of "climate change".

Out of interest, who are the few that are getting rich from climate change?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2013/10/02/monsanto-buys-climate-corp-for-930-million/

Vestas -world's largest wind turbine manufacturer. Turnover - $6 billion plus p.a.

 

[JBR]

Out of interest, who are the few that are getting rich from climate change?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2013/10/02/monsanto-buys-climate-corp-for-930-million/

Vestas -world's largest wind turbine manufacturer. Turnover - $6 billion plus p.a.

To say nothing of land-owning friends of politicians who provide sites for windmills - at a price!

 

[DeletedUser]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNgqv4yVyDw

and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkR3TI6xyzU

 

[Gasman77]

Out of interest, who are the few that are getting rich from climate change?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2013/10/02/monsanto-buys-climate-corp-for-930-million/

Vestas -world's largest wind turbine manufacturer. Turnover - $6 billion plus p.a.

To say nothing of land-owning friends of politicians who provide sites for windmills - at a price![/quote

I don't see the link between individuals and businesses making money from renewable energy and climate change being supported by the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists?

Unless you mean that the scientific community is a commodity can be bought wholesale?

 

[noseall]

I don't see the link between individuals and businesses making money from renewable energy and climate change being supported by the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists?

Unless you mean that the scientific community is a commodity can be bought wholesale?

So if enough boffins spout on about that large amounts of C02 gas are destroying the ozone layer, and force a summit and as a result countries are forced to clean up the air, what do you think happens next?

Industrial people start rubbing their hands, that's what.

Wind turbine people.

Car exhaust people.

Aircraft people.

Industrial chimney filter people.

Etc etc, blah blah.

If you think that people don't profit from this then you are extremely naïve. You don't suppose that these industrial rich kids may even subsidise scientific research do you?

 

[AronSearle]

Plenty of people profited from the carbon credits scheme, which was nothing but a government sanctioned scam. People paying for or buying 'carbon allowances', making goods more expensive (which means it is YOU paying for it), and no carbon is actually saved.

This is also of interest http://eureferendum.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/perverse-consequences.html

Other methods of profiteering are not so clearly identified as 'bad' or as a scam.

A lot of carbon taxes have been applied to people and energy companies, and this money has then been thrown around by various governments towards companies claiming to develop 'green' technology, as well as all manner of subsidies being thrown about because 'green technology'. But governments are bad at picking winners, a lot of companies have played the game to get green government grants for things that would have been paid for anyway, or alternatively would never have been paid for as they would never have worked.

It is a huge amount of money,there are simply too many examples to list and analysis which are the **** takers etc.

I'm always reminded of the guy that ran powered his solar panels by shining spotlights powered by a diesel generator, as the government grants meant this made him money.

 

[longdogs]

I don't see the link between individuals and businesses making money from renewable energy and climate change being supported by the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists?

Unless you mean that the scientific community is a commodity can be bought wholesale?

So if enough boffins spout on about that large amounts of C02 gas are destroying the ozone layer, and force a summit and as a result countries are forced to clean up the air, what do you think happens next?

Industrial people start rubbing their hands, that's what.

Wind turbine people.

Car exhaust people.

Aircraft people.

Industrial chimney filter people.

Etc etc, blah blah.

If you think that people don't profit from this then you are extremely naïve. You don't suppose that these industrial rich kids may even subsidise scientific research do you?

Rare, but I agree with you.

 

[Gasman77]

I don't see the link between individuals and businesses making money from renewable energy and climate change being supported by the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists?

Unless you mean that the scientific community is a commodity can be bought wholesale?

So if enough boffins spout on about that large amounts of C02 gas are destroying the ozone layer, and force a summit and as a result countries are forced to clean up the air, what do you think happens next?

Industrial people start rubbing their hands, that's what.

Wind turbine people.

Car exhaust people.

Aircraft people.

Industrial chimney filter people.

Etc etc, blah blah.

If you think that people don't profit from this then you are extremely naïve. You don't suppose that these industrial rich kids may even subsidise scientific research do you?

Rare, but I agree with you.

I actually find it quite offensive that you would dismiss many years of research by some of our planets brightest minds as "some boffin spouting".

If you don't think the majority of the public are able to ascertain who is funding the research, then establish for themselves whether it is biased, you are the one that is naive.

Climate change seems to be such a rare paradox, where the average chap on the street chooses not to believe scientific research ( which is, of course, peer reviewed) and just believes what they read in the local rag or on a website.

I hope your right and I'm wrong, and it is all about money etc, and the scientific community have been bribed by corporations into falsifying their research, loosing the respect of their peers and destroying their life's work in the process. The opposite result is too grave to consider it appears.....

 

[jockscott]

One thing that gets me about all of this "Climate Change" malarkey, is the subject of Feed in Tariffs. You know the scheme, whereby those who can't afford solar panels/ windmills on their houses etc, fund those who can. Surely this has got to be one of the biggest scams of the lot? ( then people wonder why a lot of us a sceptical)

 

[longdogs]

It's like the London congestion charge. designed to reduce congestion and therefore reduce emissions. The government have now taken billions of pounds in fees but London is still congested. So in other words you are allowed to f*** up the planet if you pay for it.