Alarm at new climate warning

[punky]

Originally Posted by danielf

In rapidly decreasing numbers, I'm afraid

But perhaps you would like name an eminent one that maintains that position?

I don't really have this huge stock of evidence global warming. I don't really believe one side more than the other, because after all, how would I know? There are experts for this sort of thing. And they are doing educated guess work, but it is still guess work. Michael Crichton used to say, in the 1800s, they guessed that the air would be too polluted because of the amount of horses and their waste products. Of course they never envisioned the motor car.

As you requested, I did find these:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...346489,00.html
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp...3326&sec=world

If you notice virtually all the doom-saying about global warming, is "may.." and "might..." hardly convincing, as it shows they don't know for sure.

It is just too early to get hysterical about it.

Originally Posted by punky

If you notice virtually all the doom-saying about global warming, is "may.." and "might..." hardly convincing, as it shows they don't know for sure.

It is just too early to get hysterical about it.

And what happens in 50 years if they were right and it's *TOO LATE* to do anything about it...???

Say "Oh. Sorry..."?

[MovedGoalPosts]

Originally Posted by punky

It is just too early to get hysterical about it.

And there lies the crux of the problem. Geovernments in particular are all short term, only able to see to the next election.

If climate change is happening the seeds were sown many years ago, and yet the full effects may not be apparent in our lifetimes. That is the quandry, we do not know and are unable to properly ascertain what we are doing, or the extent of our actions. But if we are detrimentally affecting the planet, since the effects of climate change are slow to become fully apparent, so are the benifits of our attempting to reduce our impact. That is why it is a matter that requires proper consideration now, not in years to come.

Yes the sudden doomsday scenario of The day After Tommorrow is (we do hope) fiction, just as the thought that horse methane in the 1800s proved to be unfounded supposition. But at what point can our planet continue to absorb the increasingly rapid changes we are inflicting on it?

Gentle chnge now in our policies may well be preferable to drastic changes in the future to achieve the same effect. Plus reduction in our consumption now, may provide much greater longevity of limited resources such as oil. For the UK our energy costs are already set to rise as our North Sea gas bonanza runs out. That is just the ecomomic impact. What else might there be?

[Richard M]

Originally Posted by danielf

Perhaps it's an idea to have the distinction between mods and admins reflected in the avatar then?

I would have thought it was obvious, seeing as you have this handy list:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showgroups.php?

[punky]

Originally Posted by Graham

And what happens in 50 years if they were right and it's *TOO LATE* to do anything about it...???

Say "Oh. Sorry..."?

So we have to whipped up into this frenzy just in case they are right? Isn't that much like people being whipped up in a frenzy in case people happen to be right about another terrorist attack.

Look at Scott's main quote. "Could rise 11c". That also means it could not as well.

We need objective investigation based on scientific principles, not hysteria.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by ianathuth

You don't need to be a scientist to realise that the weather is changing rather rapidly..

Exactly ! It has become very apparent. I remember when I was younger we used to have loads of snow in the winter and it was really bad sometimes. Now we get some Winters when it doesnt even snow at all.
Plus there have been some huge heat waves that have ripped thruogh Europe.
Look at the one from about 2 years ago when loads of elderly people died in Paris due to the heat.
Something needs to be done about it now as it really is going to be a big problem if we leave things the way they are.

Originally Posted by punky

So we have to whipped up into this frenzy just in case they are right? Isn't that much like people being whipped up in a frenzy in case people happen to be right about another terrorist attack.

Oh ye *gods* Punky! This is so ludicrous I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

*HOW* you can compare the two is beyond belief. The only rights people are going to lose if we are wrong about Global Warming is the right to pollute the planet which, IMO, is no bad thing anyway!

Look at Scott's main quote. "Could rise 11c". That also means it could not as well.

We need objective investigation based on scientific principles, not hysteria.

I agree we do. But we also don't need nonsensical comparisons with terrorist atrocities! We also don't need people burying their heads in the sand saying "well, we don't see a problem at the moment, so why bother doing anything about it?"

[punky]

Originally Posted by Graham

I agree we do. But we also don't need nonsensical comparisons with terrorist atrocities! We also don't need people burying their heads in the sand saying "well, we don't see a problem at the moment, so why bother doing anything about it?"

Nonsensical comparisons are they? Look pretty similiar to me. Both have certain groups behind them who are trying to spread mass fear and panic to the public, about something which are certainly not guaranteed to happen, to promote what agenda they want. Both even to point to world destruction, but by different methods.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Exactly ! It has become very apparent. I remember when I was younger we used to have loads of snow in the winter and it was really bad sometimes. Now we get some Winters when it doesnt even snow at all.
Plus there have been some huge heat waves that have ripped thruogh Europe.
Look at the one from about 2 years ago when loads of elderly people died in Paris due to the heat.
Something needs to be done about it now as it really is going to be a big problem if we leave things the way they are.

The older ones amongst us will have seen the changes more than the younger ones. I am not talking about the odd days of extremes but the overall changes. I have only to open my door to find the changes very clearly shown. There are plants that normally would be hibernating for winter that look more like they think it is April. Birds use our TV aerial as a perch and the droppings on the drive are much earlier than last year. Very windy weather has never been so apparent. Without any scientific measurement I can sense the changes are increasing very quickly and to the extent that catastrophic results will be commonplace in a very short time. Can we do anything about it? We may be too late already.

This makes for interesting reading and is also slightly worrying.

Originally Posted by punky

Nonsensical comparisons are they? Look pretty similiar to me. Both have certain groups behind them who are trying to spread mass fear and panic to the public, about something which are certainly not guaranteed to happen, to promote what agenda they want. Both even to point to world destruction, but by different methods.

Yes, they are nonsensical and your "justification" here is even more ridiculous.

[AndrewJ]

The fact of the matter is we know less about this planet then we do about space, which is a tad worrying, if going on the above factual statement is true and put into practise in this thread, then how can we make a factual judgement on the timetable and posibilities of global warming, this planet has had changed we STILL DO NOT understand millions of years later, and all the time they are disproving old theorys and making new ones only for them to be ruled out.

End of day matter is, we know things in the air aint helping this planet, but hell all it takes is a monster volcano and all our efforts will be gone..

Perhaps we should stop looking at space and work this planet out and stop worrying when we only have read half the book on what this planet is about and what makes it tick.

[Mr_love_monkey]

Did anyone watch the Horizon programme the other week, on Global Dimming? - I'll find a link in a minute - but basically they were saying that global dimming has been reducing the amount of sunlight that reaches the earth, and in effect cooling the earth down - they gave an example - Jet Contrails from airliners have often been believed to contribute to global dimming, but they'd never been able to prove it, however, after sept 11, when all jets stopped flying and the sky was clear for a few days, they found that the temperature leapt up bu a degree - and as soon as jets started flying again, the temperature dropped.
Now the theory is that pollutants in the air, i.e. soot etc, have been contributing to this global dimming, and as such, helping negate the effects of global warming, which they are now saying could be a lot worse than people actually originally thought...

Edit: one link
Edit : second link (the bbc! must be true! )

Originally Posted by Graham

Yes, they are nonsensical and your "justification" here is even more ridiculous.

That is just your opinion, delicately put as always.

I remember we had a few cold winters in the 1980's - which were blamed on all the dust put into the atmosphere by the massive volcano that exploded in the USA (St Helens ?).

[AndrewJ]

Originally Posted by Paul M

That is just your opinion, delicately put as always.

I remember we had a few cold winters in the 1980's - which were blamed on all the dust put into the atmosphere by the massive volcano that exploded in the USA (St Helens ?).

and the tested nukes and atomic bombs of the 60's 70's and 80's.