Aussies Living Simply

Is a warmer world a worse world?

  • This topic has 88 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by AndreAndre.
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 89 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #264528
    ahningahning
    Member

    Metu post=352068 wrote: I squarely put the onus on others to do the research for themselves. There’s more to be gleaned from the journey of pursuing knowledge, than simply being directed by others.

    True, but if we try to pursue personal knowledge of everything we’ll never have time for anything else and we might find we can’t even decide what path to knowledge to take. The most useful motto I’ve found is not “Doubt all experts” but “Trust but verify”.

    In 2007 I saw “An Inconvenient Truth” and then “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. I didn’t know which one to believe, but the issue seemed so important that I spent a significant part of the next three years trying to verify the claims of “climate worriers” and “climate soothers” and work out who to trust. By around 2010 I’d followed dozens of reference trails and I was satisfied, through my own research, that the “climate soother” case as presented to the general public is a tangle of distortion, misquoting, internal contradiction, and outright lies. Climate worriers have plenty of intense arguments and unanswered questions, but they’re about details on the edges of knowledge, not about fundamentals like the greenhouse effect.

    I don’t doubt the intelligence of the very few who create climate contrarianism or the slightly more who spread it, and I don’t know their motives – I’m sure we’ve all been intelligent and well motivated but wrong at some stage. Nature doesn’t care what intelligent people think. The planet is getting hotter, the ice is melting, the planting zones are moving poleward, the native plant and animal ranges are shifting, the oceans are getting less alkaline, and so on and so on, all independent of what intelligent people think or say about it.

    Metu, you seem to be arguing that scientists arbitrarily declare something to be settled. I’ve read enough of your posts to be pretty sure you know better than that, but I can’t pin down what you’re saying in this thread. Science as a whole can’t be arbitrary because it has to be internally consistent as well as consistent with the observable universe. Arbitrary assumptions and conventions get disclosed and results that depend on them get tested. But I think you know that so I don’t know what you mean.

    I also don’t understand what you’re getting at when you talk about one El Nino prediction for one year and then say

    the feedback of reported weather data is important for testing the Greenhouse theory – so reporting should reflect the theory. What happens when it doesn’t?

    Can you say it in a different way?

    Thanks

    Ahning

    #264529
    Anonymous
    Guest

    ah! this debate goes on and on, why? because those who promote this theory of co2 climate change have not yet sold it to the broader grassroots public, most of which believe it is the greed of the powerful in their lust to destroy habitat forest for the gain of wealth that causes this man made climate change, there has been a climate cahnge process in being for near on 6k years, that is the nature of things.

    now of course these scientists and their followers have confused the issue. there is mass destruction of habitat forests to our north (apart from the almost total destruction in oz) threatening the extinction of animals the orangatan for one, all for the furniture industry and to grow oil palms, a very good reason why the monsoonal trough is less active than it should be, where our rain generates from. everywhere where greed and power play a big part in human misery their is the evidence, oil/gas in central west africa, destruction of habitat in teh congo, same in the amazon area, in qld here greed is destrying our brigalow barrier habitats and creating deserts, heat waves and fires like qld has never had before that used to be the realms of down south after their mass destruction of the mulga barrier habitat.

    then follows mass land errosion from wind and rain, look at those slopes in tassie where they take these magnificent tree from to turn into chip or ply wood, how disrespectfull is that, how dominating over defensless nature and our weather. destruction of forests in malaysia to build an automotive city just to produce more cars to cause more pollution, this is called in touch and in balance science.

    weather should be predicted by observation as it once was when they reached up to 70% correct predictions now they are flat out attaining 50%, all this new fangled stuff can be manipulated just like the theory science of climate.

    there is as yet and never will be any cold hard facts in this less than 50 year old science, that is trying to control our lives and succeeding in only increasing the cost of living.

    for the new year and for generations to come we need to return to fact, not theory or modelling, we need to return to common sense and sense sadly lacking.

    it’s been said before how can we trust some faceless nameless person to make our lives more expensive to live when medical science fails us, once there was around 16 chem’ co’s researching antibiotics for the more powerfull bugs in our bodies caused by teh massive use of antibiotics in teh production of meat animals, now there are only 4 as their is not enough profit in antibiotics.

    facts please no more theory.

    have a good year

    len

    #264530
    SnagsSnags
    Member

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: ah! this debate goes on and on, why? because those who promote this theory of co2 climate change have not yet sold it to the broader grassroots public

    Koch bros and murdoch have spent a lot of time and effort making sure its a hard sell.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: now of course these scientists and their followers have confused the issue.

    98% consensus doesnt sound confused ?

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: there is mass destruction of habitat forests to our north (apart from the almost total destruction in oz) threatening the extinction of animals the orangatan for one, all for the furniture industry and to grow oil palms, a very good reason why the monsoonal trough is less active than it should be, where our rain generates from. everywhere where greed and power play a big part in human misery their is the evidence, oil/gas in central west africa, destruction of habitat in teh congo, same in the amazon area, in qld here greed is destrying our brigalow barrier habitats and creating deserts, heat waves and fires like qld has never had before that used to be the realms of down south after their mass destruction of the mulga barrier habitat.

    then follows mass land errosion from wind and rain, look at those slopes in tassie where they take these magnificent tree from to turn into chip or ply wood, how disrespectfull is that, how dominating over defensless nature and our weather. destruction of forests in malaysia to build an automotive city just to produce more cars to cause more pollution, this is called in touch and in balance science.

    You are describing Anthropogenic Global Warming

    just add burning of fossil fuels to make the power run the cars and trucks and drive the chainsaws and export the timber.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: weather should be predicted by observation as it once was when they reached up to 70% correct predictions now they are flat out attaining 50%, all this new fangled stuff can be manipulated just like the theory science of climate.

    Yet you claim its been changing for 6,000 years ???

    Why 6,000 where are your facts?

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: there is as yet and never will be any cold hard facts in this less than 50 year old science, that is trying to control our lives and succeeding in only increasing the cost of living.

    Surely renewable energy would reduce the input costs and reduce our cost of living.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: for the new year and for generations to come we need to return to fact, not theory or modelling, we need to return to common sense and sense sadly lacking.

    Sustainable energy production and not living beyond the earth’s carrying capacity sounds like a good start.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote:

    it’s been said before how can we trust some faceless nameless person to make our lives more expensive to live

    Agree the people who make the money from the plastic use now let someone else pay later, business as usual, growth at all costs type economy are to blame.

    Costs $100 billion a year to guarantee oil supply and the subsidies on coal far out weigh the subsidies on solar or other renewables.We pay for that.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: when medical science fails us, once there was around 16 chem’ co’s researching antibiotics for the more powerfull bugs in our bodies caused by teh massive use of antibiotics in teh production of meat animals, now there are only 4 as their is not enough profit in antibiotics.

    You need to legislate or nationalise drug research.

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: facts please no more theory.

    Agree where are your facts?

    gardenlen post=352074 wrote: have a good year

    len

    you too

    #264531
    BullseyeBullseye
    Member

    Len –

    there has been a climate cahnge process in being for near on 6k years, that is the nature of things.

    How could you know that one way or another, did you personally witness this process or, did you use scientific information from observation and data recording, in order to state that as fact?

    We know you aren’t 6000 years old…

    So, if you used and accepted science to tell you what occurred in that “6k years”, then by virtue you’d accept the same scientific principals, “the scientific method” that underpins the science of anthropomorphic climate change…

    Or, if you state, purely by your own opinion, to make the claim that the climate change process has been occurring for 6000 years, what is your method to establish that process as fact?

    #264532
    BullseyeBullseye
    Member

    Metu –

    “BOM is still sticking with their El Nino, at least until the end of the year.”

    Would you clarify what you are stating in this sentence?

    #264533
    Anonymous
    Guest

    bullseye,

    for one teh science is teh one using pure theory without fact, anthropomorphic is a modern applied term to try and isolate thier co2 climate change from what they are trying to convince us of which they can’t as it is all models and theory no fact.

    by earth terms teh science is brand new around 50 years max, yes they ahve cast their net wide to capture any sniff to support them from about 100 or so years agao, still about 600 years ago they tried to tell a simple sailer the earth was flat, but he knew what was in teh bible and maybe just maybe what muslims believed.

    and before it is said modern science still works on flat earth theories, with littel to no real vision.

    len

    #264534
    MuklukMukluk
    Participant

    gardenlen post=352091 wrote: still about 600 years ago they tried to tell a simple sailer the earth was flat, but he knew what was in teh bible and maybe just maybe what muslims believed.

    and before it is said modern science still works on flat earth theories, with littel to no real vision.

    I must apologise that this is off topic, but i keep seeing this kind of nonsense so thought i best pipe in. Pythagoras proved the earth was roughly spherical around 500BC. I don’t know what sailer you are referring to, there are some stories about Christopher Columbus being told the world was flat but that never actually happened. Columbus and the scholars and scientists of the time knew full well that the earth was round and that he would not sail off the edge.

    #264535
    lostinthefoglostinthefog
    Member

    I do think that climate change has always been a part of the Earths history…I remember watching a doco years ago where they unearthed the remains of a tropical sea in the middle of the English countryside so obviously climate isn’t a static thing…I think the actions of humans have speeded up the natural processes.

    How well science can predict how extreme the changes will be is a bit of a moot point, in my opinion we aren’t much better at predicting the future than the Mayans…

    I know the weather conditions ATM seem to point to some sort of catastrophic climate shift but there have been plenty of times when the weather has been extreme in the past and it wasn’t viewed as anything but an extreme event…the Brisbane floods in the 70’s, Cyclone Tracy and the Ash Wednesday fires…

    #264536
    AndreAndre
    Keymaster

    I do find it amusing to hear those who require hard facts to base their belief, can then start quoting the bible. I for one ‘don’t live by it’.

    Not wanting to go off-topic, but where is the science/hard facts in that?

    :whistle:

    #264537
    SnagsSnags
    Member

    lostinthefog post=352118 wrote: I do think that climate change has always been a part of the Earths history…I remember watching a doco years ago where they unearthed the remains of a tropical sea in the middle of the English countryside so obviously climate isn’t a static thing…

    Neither is plate tectonics

    #264538
    Anonymous
    Guest

    andre, no one requiring you to believe in the bible not like people require others to believe teh science that has no hard written history beyond maybe 1k years max

    for me to bible is a written history book started 5k or so years ago untill someone comes up with provable ahrd evidence from another source then for consistancy i will still believe, creation did come before evolution by a long way. and evolutionary religions have no proof positive.

    why can’t believers of the scinces sell their theoretical beliefs? if they did so then us other would have nowhere to go hey chuckle?

    and modern written papers and peer revue stand for nothing.

    #264539
    lostinthefoglostinthefog
    Member

    Well, isn’t plate tectonics a natural thing? That’s my point entirely…there always has been climate change…it’s not a new thing. Maybe part of the current climate changes are caused by tectonic shifts…

    #264540
    AndreAndre
    Keymaster

    :hijacked:

    Len, I’m not doubting your belief at all. I’m happy for you to believe in something.

    Similarly, no one is requiring you to believe in the science of Climate Change .. what is, is. “Whatever” is happening to our climate will happen, whether you believe in it or not.

    But when you go on to say you need scientific fact, and not theory, yet you mention your belief in the bible – I just wonder what you would regard as sufficient evidence. (which is the main point of this post)

    BUT, that’s for another thread – which won’t be allowed since we aren’t supposed to argue the pro’s and cons of religious belief (- or disbelief) .

    Please don’t think I’m knocking your flavour of religion, but in your ‘argument’, you poo-poo a particular belief (and there are those that DO believe in climate change of some sort) and then mention your belief (which not everyone believes in). You have to take the ‘good’ with the ‘bad’.

    What is it they say:

    “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.” Abraham Lincoln

    #264541
    Anonymous
    Guest

    what abe’ lincoln said is true the climate scientists ans their believers should pay heed.

    the bible stands as 6k years of writtne proof on its own, where science has tried to bring it down to their level they have largely failed but have proven much of it, so i would suggest an obviously intelligent person like your self should study the subject before you denegrate it.

    now as for co2 climate change that has no such evidence, is based on speculation and conjecture and as they want to convert all they had better come up with the goods don’t you think?

    and they can’t come up with the goods as they don’t know them, the fix will never work, planting habitat will stopping our coal fired pwoer stations will never work in reality, so our less than 2% pollution input to the world is well and truely over shadowed by china with about 1 billion people where i’d be thinking only about 50% or less of them get power from their 300 coal fired stations being increased to 600+.

    all the co2 factor is going to deliver is a level of misery in aus’ never before seen. and seems clear to me promoters of the co2 factor are not humanitarians.

    good thing chris columbas didn’t listen to those flat earth scientists hey.

    so people in aus’ suffer for nothing

    len

    #264542
    Anonymous
    Guest

    i think ‘lostinthefog’, theya re trying to blame us living on earth for the earthquakes and volcano’s that come along. they clutch at straws.

    len

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 89 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.