Climate change.

[AronSearle]

How can anyone deny it or its cause? If you don't think it is human activity - then tell us what it is. (they won't)


http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...eorological-organisation-8686167.html[/QUOTE]

Modern measurements = 1850

Oh right then.

Let's just ignore the other billions of years, or even the several hundred before that, that saw the medieval warm period, and the wet period that caused massive famines preceding the plague.

Not that the above invalidates the argument that C02 impacts the climate, but any climate article that starts waffling on about "since modern measurements" can GTFO.

 

[joe-90]

But every other climate change is tracked down to volcanic eruptions, earth wobble etc. We can rule all of those out today - yet we are warming at an ever greater rate. Wake up mate, FFS, stop being a bandwagon-billy.

 

[itshere]

Making the rich richer with green taxes wont achieve anything.

We are in a world recession and yet the sale of private jets has never been so good?

my little put put car would have to run for a thousand years to create the crap a single trip to Ibiza by an MP would make.

 

[joe-90]

It's the sheer number of cars now that India and China are joining the club, and CONCRETE is one of the biggest culprits. Bet you've got some cement in your house.

 

[itshere]

It's the sheer number of cars now that India and China are joining the club, and CONCRETE is one of the biggest culprits. Bet you've got some cement in your house.

I have but YOUR house is built of STRAW

 

[joe-90]

My house is Victorian.

 

[snico]

Well why can't you tell me why the climate is changing then? Stop being a Bandwagon-Billy. Think for yourself for a change.

The natural CO2 cycle, which has been balanced for thousands of years is no longer balanced, due to us. Simple really.

But due to us how?

I say its simply the increasing population.

As Paul McKenna once said if man wants to save the earth then we all simply need to kill ourselves.

Passing money around wont achieve anything.

Industrial revolution, manufacturing, air travel, road travel, deforestation, increase in pollution etc.

Population increase wont help either, CO2 levels have risen almost 40% since the industrial revolution.

At the time we didn't know the effects.

 

[AronSearle]

Population increase wont help either, CO2 levels have risen almost 40% since the industrial revolution.

At the time we didn't know the effects.

I'm sure the Victorians would have wailed in horror had they been told temperatures might rise by 2c by 2100.

My house is Victorian.

So you believe in the CO2 fear mongering, and yet live in the type of property that contributes more to CO2 than most.

I do hope you are cladding it with highly insulated render, insulating the floor, and roof.

?

 

[snico]

Population increase wont help either, CO2 levels have risen almost 40% since the industrial revolution.

At the time we didn't know the effects.

I'm sure the Victorians would have wailed in horror had they been told temperatures might rise by 2c by 2100.

My house is Victorian.

So you believe in the CO2 fear mongering, and yet live in the type of property that contributes more to CO2 than most.

I do hope you are cladding it with highly insulated render, insulating the floor, and roof.

?

2oC rise is what scientists call a safe limit, any higher and there would severe droughts and food shortage in many parts of the world.

Like I said they didn't know the outcome, i'm sure they would have done things differently if they knew.


Why is it fear mongering?

Methane gas does the most damage in our atmosphere, but only survives for a few years, CO2 lasts for over hundred years in our atmosphere, so the build up and amount causes more damage.

CO2 traps more heat, the more heat we have the more water vapour we have in the atmosphere. Hence, climate change. That's why over the last few thousand years the balance has always been stable, apart from the last 200 years or so.

 

[jeds]

How can anyone deny it or its cause? If you don't think it is human activity - then tell us what it is. (they won't)


http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...eorological-organisation-8686167.html[/QUOTE]

Most of those who deny it are those who don't understand the difference between climate and weather. Or, more often, don't realise that what happens on our tiny little Island isn't representative of trends happening across the entire world.

That's right. And the Independent article is a good example of a weather trend. Typical sort of misleading rubbish usually found in these sort of articles. The 30 year average global temperature is up by +0.07°C in May and has been steadily rising by about that rate since 1880. I don't see how anybody can deny that. The cause is up for debate though and a couple of things are causing climate change devotees a bit of grief at the moment.

Global average temperature has been flat for about the last 13 years. In fact it has slightly dipped. Normally this could have been put down to weather trends rather than climate change but the dip has allowed scientists (proper open minded ones - not the blinkered climate lot) to identify a strong correlation with chlorofluorocarbons. It has always been a difficult one to explain how CO2 has risen 6 fold on the last 60 years but temperature hasn't really responded. And it's also quite difficult to explain how it continued to soar over the last 13 years but temperature didn't. Well this might be the answer.

If this is true then it's good news because we started controlling CFCs years ago and the downward trend is set to continue for 50 or 60 years. Maybe not quite such good news for the climate lot but no need to feel sorry for them. Most have had a whole career out of it and will retire quietly with their fortunes.

 

[snico]

The average global temp has been rising for hundreds of years, and sea levels are rising too.

 

[AronSearle]

2oC rise is what scientists call a safe limit

Really, which ones?

What about when the earth was 8-10c warmer?

any higher and there would severe droughts and food shortage in many parts of the world.

Severe droughts have always happened to some parts of the world. Parts of the world that were once desert are now jungle, parts of the world that are now desert may see increased rainfall and forestation (the sahara may become a grassland again).

I see no reasonable argument that this should lead to food shortages, overall food production should actually increase with more arable land, and increased CO2.

Methane gas does the most damage in our atmosphere, but only survives for a few years, CO2 lasts for over hundred years in our atmosphere, so the build up and amount causes more damage.

Circular reasoning, co2 does more damage because of more co2.

CO2 traps more heat, the more heat we have the more water vapour we have in the atmosphere.

Not sure what you are trying to say.

Either you are referring to positive feedback loops as seen in climate models (but not yet in the real world), or you are trying to say the "severe droughts" we will apparently encounter will be because of more water vapour.......which is a strange argument..........

That's why over the last few thousand years the balance has always been stable, apart from the last 200 years or so.

So you want to ignore the weather events that caused famine and plague in europe and the prequel medieval warming period.

But yea, other than when it wasn't stable, it was stable

 

[snico]

Look what has happened since we started to pollute the atmosphere with 40% more CO2

 

[jockscott]

And the great Climate Change believer, shows his true colours.

The earth is actually in its naturally cold cycle at the moment - God help us when we go into a warm phase.

How on earth can the planet be in it's naturally cold cycle, if it's all down to man? Make yer bloody mind up Joe, or are ye just trolling as usual?

 

[joe-90]

I didn't say it was all down to man FFS, The earth has a natural wobble that affects the weather - but it is known and documented and predictive.