O/T: The climate change scam

[ncfcog]

And what revolutions caused the changes in this link?

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

Well even that article mentions mankind’s affect on the earths climatic changes? There’s no avoiythe issue.

I don’t dispute cyclic changes in weather, the data is there to see, the OP asks is climate change real, well of course it is, even ifs its a natural phenomenon.

[sevens_a_secret]

The pollutants released from the burning of fossil fuels over the past 200 years have been punching great big holes in the ozone layer which is there to protect us from the suns harmful rays.

That's not true, I'm afraid. Damage to the ozone layer is caused by chlorofluorocarbons, which used to be used in fridges, air-cons and as propellant in aerosol cans.

In some cases the ozone layer is actually doing it's job but too well and reflecting these harmful pollutants back down to earth causing what you will know as the greenhouse effect.

Again, this is just wrong. The ozone layer protects from solar UV light, not global pollutants. The greenhouse effect is caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide. Methane also plays a significant role (23 times worse than CO2).

Some are asking what to do. It has been identified that the keeping of livestock, whether for meat or dairy production, is also a major source of greenhouse gases, namely methane.

This has been driving the recent rise in numbers of vegans, who now do it to reduce carbon footprint instead of the old animal welfare reason. No need to go whole hog, so to speak, some people are just reducing the amount of meat they eat. Perhaps you could try that?

[BigFatPie]

Sam Harris talks about the Dunning-Kruger effect and conspiracy theories here https://youtu.be/krObAMBkjT4

Some of you may find it interesting.

If it wasn’t for the Dunning-Kruger effect, this and every other board would be very quiet.

Pubs would probably shut as well.

[Old_pie]

Well even that article mentions mankind’s affect on the earths climatic changes? There’s no avoiythe issue.

I don’t dispute cyclic changes in weather, the data is there to see, the OP asks is climate change real, well of course it is, even ifs its a natural phenomenon.

That's not how I read the OP's post.

My comment to you was what I said in response to your "industrial revolution" statement.

[ncfcog]

That's not true, I'm afraid. Damage to the ozone layer is caused by chlorofluorocarbons, which used to be used in fridges, air-cons and as propellant in aerosol cans.



Again, this is just wrong. The ozone layer protects from solar UV light, not global pollutants. The greenhouse effect is caused by increased levels of carbon dioxide. Methane also plays a significant role (23 times worse than CO2).

Some are asking what to do. It has been identified that the keeping of livestock, whether for meat or dairy production, is also a major source of greenhouse gases, namely methane.

This has been driving the recent rise in numbers of vegans, who now do it to reduce carbon footprint instead of the old animal welfare reason. No need to go whole hog, so to speak, some people are just reducing the amount of meat they eat. Perhaps you could try that?

I think maybe you took my posts too literally, I was really just generalising. As I mentioned I’m sure there will be some on here who can explain things in a much clearer way than I did. If nothing else I can take comfort in the fact that my half ar5ed attempt to put a point across has contributed in some way to others now being better informed.

[ncfcog]

That's not how I read the OP's post.

My comment to you was what I said in response to your "industrial revolution" statement.

Surely you must acknowledge that mankind, primarily through its industrial and technological evolution has had an affect on the planet’s environment even if in parallel with natural forces?

[MagpieTony]

Firstly, let me just say that nobody is denying the climactic changes in temperature. This is an undeniable truth that has been evidenced throughout history and contrary to assumption I am not a 'flat earther'. The question surrounds whether these changes are precipitated
or even expedited by man. My intent on this thread was to challenge a narrative based on contrary evidence. There have been over 40 different reports published this year alone by scientists involved in this field from all over the world denying both the scientific integrity of the processes and the conclusions drawn by the climate change lobby. However, these reports are never aired and the information and arguments are suppressed. Why? Our new friend Captain Balrog may have inadvertently hit upon a truth in the midst of his largely derogatory verbiage "That’s a common sign of cult like behaviour --- starting with the premise that you are right and then searching for any supporting voice regardless of who they are. And anyone will do." Did this whole thing start as a scientific investigation but then become exploited by people who saw the vast money making potential of such a scheme? People become very protective and hostile whenever this subject is broached and accusations and labels abound. Uneducated, conspiracy theorist etc etc. Strangely enough, there is an article in the Telegraph today on this subject that I have linked below. I'll comment more later.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ohp9Y7aAvtEUVE

[Old_pie]

Surely you must acknowledge that mankind, primarily through its industrial and technological evolution has had an affect on the planet’s environment even if in parallel with natural forces?

I'm only saying that there have been big changes in climate before so I don't know if I can separate what causes what and to what effect. Not all things that appear must be logical are in fact proved to be so. What I do know is obfuscation doesn't help my understanding and neither does it help the cause. When millions of megawatts are produced each lightning strike (Radcliffe on Soar produces 200megawatts) then our efforts can be puny compared to what nature can produce. As the video says the Sun is massive and it only takes minor variations in that fusion reactor to cause major changes here. The power of volcanoes and earthquakes is beyond anything we can conjure up.

I'd just like clearer interpretation of facts and less emotion and a ban on those who do not understand the science on writing about it.

[MagpieMike]

It's oh so easy to believe a narrative......that's why we're in the mess we are in. Now, there is no excuse for not challenging false narratives. Unless of course you're happy with everything or too lazy to do actual research of your own in which case you can just be a sheep. the people on this documentary are far more qualified than any on here to actually comment on what has become a political and money making exercise. If you listen to the contrary evidence and weigh it against the presenting evidence and still believe that global cimate change is the issue that it is built up to be the fair enough. I have heard enough evidence from very prominent experts in this field that convince me otherwise. The science for global warming does not add up. Only when weighed against the political events of today can you see what global climate change is all about.

And of course we all know that the world is flat, and Notts have had the best defence in league 2 all season....

[sevens_a_secret]

Strangely enough, there is an article in the Telegraph today on this subject that I have linked below. I'll comment more later.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...ohp9Y7aAvtEUVE

Your link is nearly 10 years out of date!

By Christopher Booker
6:10PM GMT 28 Nov 2009