I don't think anyone disputes climate change per se but what is down to nature and what is down to man is or should be another debate.
Yet the powers that be seek to stifle that debate. The silencing of Craig (David) Bellamy being one example.
Call me a cynic if you like but blaming 'man' opens up wonderful opportunities for imposing social control and suppression of the individual all in the interests of 'saving the planet' of course. Not to mention all the money invested one way or the other by the 'great and the good' in so called renewables and ancillary industries.
Apparently CO 2 levels were higher in the Middle Ages than they are now yet nobody was driving cars or flying aeroplanes then.
Quick search on this and it is mentioned by the daily mail and some obtuse blogs. Think I'll go for NASA's and countless peer reviewed respected journal articles on that one.
People continuing to debate the problems that face us, given the sheer weight of evidence is bewildering to say the least. Even taking climate change out of the equation, what we are doing to our planet is horrendous.
People are becoming more and more aware of the damage that has been/is being done, which can only be seen as a good thing but we need to do more and the questions should move away from burden of proof to what can be done.
This feels like old news to me. 12 years to reverse the effects of climate change? Double that would not be enough. In the immortal words of Bill Hicks “we are a virus, with shoes”.
I remember seeing a show, where it was explained (by someone who actually studies it) that as countries become more developed, and have better education, equality and less child mortality, that kind of thing, the number of children tends to decrease, to close to two. This is happening in Europe and increasingly in many other countries (Bangladesh happened to be an example where this is starting to happen). Will take a lot of hard work, and time, but this is where the world seems to be heading.
If the seas rise five metres there won't even BE a Bangladesh! Happy days mate
I'm surprised that all new houses aren't being built with solar panels. The Government should make it a condition for planning permission.
I remember going to Miami back in 2015, talking to a local cab driver who wasn’t from Central America and actually grew up there. We referenced the whole foods store which I think had solar panels. I asked the cab driver why there weren’t more buildings using them given it was the sunshine state. He said it’s the absolute last thing the government want. And Miami will be one of the first places to perish when the sea levels rise. Florida is already sink holed to the hilt
Basically we need to take all the people that deny climate change and stick them in Mauritius, Venice and whatever low lying or natural disaster zones we can find and let the rest of us who get it or are concerned, watch them go first. I nominate trump to head up the mission.
This feels like old news to me. 12 years to reverse the effects of climate change? Double that would not be enough. In the immortal words of Bill Hicks “we are a virus, with shoes”.
Just watched the documentary 'Above and Beyond', it is a celebration of NASA's 60th anniversary, an institution that went to the Moon, the surface of Mars and the outer edge of the Solar system. The thing that stands out from the program is how their exploration of space has enabled and advanced the knowledge of planet Earth.
If you watch and listen (and I mean really listen) to these genius people who have achieved so much, then you will realise how delicate the Earth and its atmosphere is and how we are directly responsible for its well being and the future prosperity of the human race.
The documentary lasts 90 minutes and outlines a host of incredible achievements, and yet despite all that, the program concludes with the most significant statement ...
'And here is our World, the planet Earth, unique, fragile and in need of our care. The earth science data NASA has gathered over the decades, factual, comprehensive and deeply concerning, shows that the World we know is in jeopardy. 60 years ago our goal was to put a man on the Moon, today we face a new and even greater challenge, to protect our planet. It is a challenge that we need to accept, one we cannot postpone and for the sake of life on Earth, one we simply must win'.
Food waste is an easy one for individuals to take influence, i.e. cutting down on wasted food and making sure any unavoidable food waste is recycled - if food waste was a country, it'd be the third highest global greenhouse gas emitter (global food waste represents more greenhouse gas emissions than any country in the world except for China and the US).
When people start dying in their tens of millions then the elites responsible for all this will probably lift a finger. Obviously by then it'll be far too late
one way of stopping the ever growing population.
I think a lot of it is just scare mongering & mumbo jumbo. Not likely that they were going to say that everything was ok & Ttump was right. Turkeys dont vote for Christmas you know.
I dont care anyway. I wont be here in 50 years & I dont expect much will change over the following 50 years either. Not my problem. As I've said for years - what good does it do putting my empty yoghurt pots & milk containers in the recycling when 200 million Chinese are polluting the atmosphere.
The opposition viewpoint is not being reflected on the unbiased balanced BBC.
The news has been full of the apocalyptic claims of the IPCC today. Why no mention of this I wonder?
There was a climate change denier on Newsnight last night attempting to make the same criticisms of the scientific community. Democrat states take the question seriously but are accused of pursuing an anti-energy agenda. Why change what is wonderful asks the Trump adviser as well as Melanie Philips?!
He's probably funded by fossil fuel giants and he was repeatedly challenged as to why he felt that he knows more than the scientists. In fact Newsnight refused to give him the scientific credibility by debating his "alternative facts". Instead they simply asked why the professional scientific community would knowingly corrupt itself by misrepresenting the reality. Why would it conspire to make up some irrational theories and models?
And the guy proceeded to describe a conspiracy...
Saw this overall approach to arguing with Luddites elsewhere yesterday. It's not censorship but simply challenging the underlying agenda. In light of Trump and Brexit this is a perfectly rational journalistic stance. Journalist are there to uncover the truth, not be manipulated by powerful conservative agendas seeking to block change.
There are powers and civilizations benefiting from the status quo. However, the quicker the global community models, designs and rolls out solutions, the quicker there will be a change. And the required change will need to be far less dramatic to ensure a large change in the future.
To paraphrase Gove from 2016, many have had enough of lobbyists disparaging experts!
I am with Leuth and given the constant headlines about extreme weather events I am absolutely astonished there are still lots of doubters and sceptics out there but I guess its a northern European perspective.
Living in Asia has dispelled any doubts I once had- every summer is significantly hotter and unpredictable than the previous one. And it's not a sunbathing opportunity at all, as we approach the critical temperature humans just can't survive outside for sustained periods. Instinctively, you feel it just ain't natural and scientists say the impact is exponential so it will get much worse much more quickly.
My worry is that it's the poor and unrepresented who suffer most from climate chaos. Seeds don't germinate, drinking water supplies run dry, or rivers flood, damns burst, crops fail, landslides bury your home or its just too hot to til the field or even walk to work. Even in developed cities like Hong Kong it's the poor that cant afford air conditioning and live in cramped sub-divided flats with poor sanitation.
The political elite can turn up the A/C and order another crate of chilled Perrier for now but eventually everyone's water supply will dry up.
PS Don't be too hard on China- they are converting to renewable energy and developing new solar (and nuclear) energy faster than any other nation. At least, their political elite are not in denial about the problem or blaming others.
China does more damage to global warming than America and Europe put together. Whatever we do in the UK to limit the problem is pretty much irrelevant. Not saying we should not try but putting it in perspective.
It also has a higher population than Europe and America, look at per capita figures and you'll see a very different picture.
The opposition viewpoint is not being reflected on the unbiased balanced BBC.
The news has been full of the apocalyptic claims of the IPCC today. Why no mention of this I wonder?
There was a climate change denier on Newsnight last night attempting to make the same criticisms of the scientific community. Democrat states take the question seriously but are accused of pursuing an anti-energy agenda. Why change what is wonderful asks the Trump adviser as well as Melanie Philips?!
He's probably funded by fossil fuel giants and he was repeatedly challenged as to why he felt that he knows more than the scientists. In fact Newsnight refused to give him the scientific credibility by debating his "alternative facts". Instead they simply asked why the professional scientific community would knowingly corrupt itself by misrepresenting the reality. Why would it conspire to make up some irrational theories and models?
And the guy proceeded to describe a conspiracy...
Saw this overall approach to arguing with Luddites elsewhere yesterday. It's not censorship but simply challenging the underlying agenda. In light of Trump and Brexit this is a perfectly rational journalistic stance. Journalist are there to uncover the truth, not be manipulated by powerful conservative agendas seeking to block change.
There are powers and civilizations benefiting from the status quo. However, the quicker the global community models, designs and rolls out solutions, the quicker there will be a change. And the required change will need to be far less dramatic to ensure a large change in the future.
To paraphrase Gove from 2016, many have had enough of lobbyists disparaging experts!
Evan Davis certainly ripped that guy a new one. A real lol moment for me.
I remember reading the Carl Sagan book Cosmos, written in 1980. That mentioned global warming which then wasn't broadly accepted. Things have got a lot worse since, and the evidence is overwhelming. Why anyone still questions it I cannot fathom
PS Don't be too hard on China- they are converting to renewable energy and developing new solar (and nuclear) energy faster than any other nation. At least, their political elite are not in denial about the problem or blaming others.
I'm glad someone else said it, a lot of China bashing from people who have no idea about the country.
More is being done here to combat environmental issues than I've seen in any other counties.
"Quite simply, Western civilization has become unmoored from its core principles rooted in its foundational text of biblical morality."
So now you know why some people challenge even the idea of man made climate change. It doesn't tally with the creationist reading of the Bible so can't be true.
I remember reading the Carl Sagan book Cosmos, written in 1980. That mentioned global warming which then wasn't broadly accepted. Things have got a lot worse since, and the evidence is overwhelming. Why anyone still questions it I cannot fathom
Climate change is one of the main drivers of migration, as harvests fail in warmer areas driving people to flee. It's not like this is new, but it is on an unprecedented scale. And I think Leuth focuses on the elites because it is they who are denying it, such as media owners, shadowy foundations like the Koch Brothers, Trump. Already the Australian govt have come out and called it "some sort of report" and pledged to carry on with coal, but then it appears to be a badge of honour in Australia (arguably the most climate-stressed continent) to ignore any scientific warnings. (Visit the Great Barrier Reef soon if you want to, it won't be there for long). And as for the BBC allowing these deniers on there so often, Nigel Lawson is to climate science what Roland Duchatelet is to football club ownership - clueless. They never seek for similar balance in pieces about say, the Holocaust, and get a Nazi in to say the Jews deserved it. And the bastards insist that the Earth is round....
Will anything happen? Not in anywhere that speaks English. Pinning what few hopes i have on China and Europe, and even with that I'm less optimistic about climate change than I am about Charlton under the Rat.
The opposition viewpoint is not being reflected on the unbiased balanced BBC.
The news has been full of the apocalyptic claims of the IPCC today. Why no mention of this I wonder?
The view might seem unbalanced in its reporting certainly but that is with good reason. Any credible scientific study points towards climate change and a tipping point at around 1.5 degrees Celsius. It’s an understatement to say that the body of evidence is overwhelming. Trying to find a “credible” scientist that disagrees is not easy. Any that do are usually are sponsored by the fossil fuel lobby which is huge. It’s exactly the same as what we see where science in some discredited quarters still refutes the link between smoking and cancer. A few hundred years ago despite the evidence to the contrary some men of learning insisted the earth was flat.
The lesson to be learned here is that you really do need to listen to the experts. When the evidence has such weight to do anything else is just plain stupidity. This warning by the scientific community is so stark that we cannot afford to ignore it. We will of course. Achieving the targets required will require an unprecedented amount of international will and cooperation along with short and medium term hardships. It’s not going to happen is it ?
Well the IPCC may be right, but now that the BBC have banned anybody who opposes them from appearing we only have their word for it. Personally I would like to hear some critical or dissident voices before I make my mind up.
"Yes, my car is parked across these railway lines, and I can see a train coming, but I'd like to hear a dissenting opinion before I drive away"
When I ask somebody if it is raining now I get a fact. When I ask if it will be raining tomorrow I get an opinion.
It seems like you're asking the wrong question, then. Perhaps you'd do better asking one or more of these:
- Are CO2 levels in the atmosphere increasing? - Is the Earth's surface temperature getting hotter? - Are sea temperatures rising? - Are the ice sheets at the poles receding? - Is the sea ice less thick that it used to be? - Are the glaciers in all major mountain regions in recession? - Is ocean acidity increasing? - Does the norther hemisphere now have less snow cover in winter? - Are sea levels rising? - Are variations in sea levels increasing? - Has there been and increase in the number of extreme weather events?
When you've done a bit of research and found that the answers to all of the above are positive (in a logical sense, not outcomes), perhaps you should ask yourself, why on earth do I still doubt that this is happening?
Germans trying to shift the problem with diesel cars.
The European Commission fears that carmakers in Germany would seek to export old diesel cars removed from German streets under planned trade-off incentives to eastern European countries. Last year, Bulgaria imported more than 100,000 second hand cars from EU countries, more than a third of which were grossly polluting diesels, according to clean mobility group Transport and Environment.
Well the IPCC may be right, but now that the BBC have banned anybody who opposes them from appearing we only have their word for it. Personally I would like to hear some critical or dissident voices before I make my mind up.
"Yes, my car is parked across these railway lines, and I can see a train coming, but I'd like to hear a dissenting opinion before I drive away"
When I ask somebody if it is raining now I get a fact. When I ask if it will be raining tomorrow I get an opinion.
It seems like you're asking the wrong question, then. Perhaps you'd do better asking one or more of these:
- Are CO2 levels in the atmosphere increasing? - Is the Earth's surface temperature getting hotter? - Are sea temperatures rising? - Are the ice sheets at the poles receding? - Is the sea ice less thick that it used to be? - Are the glaciers in all major mountain regions in recession? - Is ocean acidity increasing? - Does the norther hemisphere now have less snow cover in winter? - Are sea levels rising? - Are variations in sea levels increasing? - Has there been and increase in the number of extreme weather events?
When you've done a bit of research and found that the answers to all of the above are positive (in a logical sense, not outcomes), perhaps you should ask yourself, why on earth do I still doubt that this is happening?
It's much easier to pretend things aren't happening or dismiss any reports as 'fake news'. I imagine there are some on here who'd deny there was a problem with the plastic pollution in the sea.
Most politicians don't give a shit and big business is concerned about a PR exercise. Hopefully all the scientists doing the research are just making it all up for a laugh.
Too many competing interests for governments to address this.
Comments
People continuing to debate the problems that face us, given the sheer weight of evidence is bewildering to say the least. Even taking climate change out of the equation, what we are doing to our planet is horrendous.
People are becoming more and more aware of the damage that has been/is being done, which can only be seen as a good thing but we need to do more and the questions should move away from burden of proof to what can be done.
Basically we need to take all the people that deny climate change and stick them in Mauritius, Venice and whatever low lying or natural disaster zones we can find and let the rest of us who get it or are concerned, watch them go first. I nominate trump to head up the mission.
"You're a bunch of fucking wankers"
We're all doomed.
The opposition viewpoint is not being reflected on the unbiased balanced BBC.
The news has been full of the apocalyptic claims of the IPCC today. Why no mention of this I wonder?
If you watch and listen (and I mean really listen) to these genius people who have achieved so much, then you will realise how delicate the Earth and its atmosphere is and how we are directly responsible for its well being and the future prosperity of the human race.
The documentary lasts 90 minutes and outlines a host of incredible achievements, and yet despite all that, the program concludes with the most significant statement ...
'And here is our World, the planet Earth, unique, fragile and in need of our care. The earth science data NASA has gathered over the decades, factual, comprehensive and deeply concerning, shows that the World we know is in jeopardy. 60 years ago our goal was to put a man on the Moon, today we face a new and even greater challenge, to protect our planet. It is a challenge that we need to accept, one we cannot postpone and for the sake of life on Earth, one we simply must win'.
I think a lot of it is just scare mongering & mumbo jumbo. Not likely that they were going to say that everything was ok & Ttump was right. Turkeys dont vote for Christmas you know.
I dont care anyway. I wont be here in 50 years & I dont expect much will change over the following 50 years either. Not my problem. As I've said for years - what good does it do putting my empty yoghurt pots & milk containers in the recycling when 200 million Chinese are polluting the atmosphere.
He's probably funded by fossil fuel giants and he was repeatedly challenged as to why he felt that he knows more than the scientists. In fact Newsnight refused to give him the scientific credibility by debating his "alternative facts". Instead they simply asked why the professional scientific community would knowingly corrupt itself by misrepresenting the reality. Why would it conspire to make up some irrational theories and models?
And the guy proceeded to describe a conspiracy...
Saw this overall approach to arguing with Luddites elsewhere yesterday. It's not censorship but simply challenging the underlying agenda. In light of Trump and Brexit this is a perfectly rational journalistic stance. Journalist are there to uncover the truth, not be manipulated by powerful conservative agendas seeking to block change.
There are powers and civilizations benefiting from the status quo. However, the quicker the global community models, designs and rolls out solutions, the quicker there will be a change. And the required change will need to be far less dramatic to ensure a large change in the future.
To paraphrase Gove from 2016, many have had enough of lobbyists disparaging experts!
Living in Asia has dispelled any doubts I once had- every summer is significantly hotter and unpredictable than the previous one. And it's not a sunbathing opportunity at all, as we approach the critical temperature humans just can't survive outside for sustained periods. Instinctively, you feel it just ain't natural and scientists say the impact is exponential so it will get much worse much more quickly.
My worry is that it's the poor and unrepresented who suffer most from climate chaos. Seeds don't germinate, drinking water supplies run dry, or rivers flood, damns burst, crops fail, landslides bury your home or its just too hot to til the field or even walk to work. Even in developed cities like Hong Kong it's the poor that cant afford air conditioning and live in cramped sub-divided flats with poor sanitation.
The political elite can turn up the A/C and order another crate of chilled Perrier for now but eventually everyone's water supply will dry up.
PS Don't be too hard on China- they are converting to renewable energy and developing new solar (and nuclear) energy faster than any other nation. At least, their political elite are not in denial about the problem or blaming others.
More is being done here to combat environmental issues than I've seen in any other counties.
"Quite simply, Western civilization has become unmoored from its core principles rooted in its foundational text of biblical morality."
So now you know why some people challenge even the idea of man made climate change. It doesn't tally with the creationist reading of the Bible so can't be true.
Sagan is the Darwin of the 20th century. Hero.
I am just not bothered by it.
And I think Leuth focuses on the elites because it is they who are denying it, such as media owners, shadowy foundations like the Koch Brothers, Trump. Already the Australian govt have come out and called it "some sort of report" and pledged to carry on with coal, but then it appears to be a badge of honour in Australia (arguably the most climate-stressed continent) to ignore any scientific warnings. (Visit the Great Barrier Reef soon if you want to, it won't be there for long).
And as for the BBC allowing these deniers on there so often, Nigel Lawson is to climate science what Roland Duchatelet is to football club ownership - clueless. They never seek for similar balance in pieces about say, the Holocaust, and get a Nazi in to say the Jews deserved it. And the bastards insist that the Earth is round....
Will anything happen? Not in anywhere that speaks English. Pinning what few hopes i have on China and Europe, and even with that I'm less optimistic about climate change than I am about Charlton under the Rat.
The lesson to be learned here is that you really do need to listen to the experts. When the evidence has such weight to do anything else is just plain stupidity. This warning by the scientific community is so stark that we cannot afford to ignore it. We will of course. Achieving the targets required will require an unprecedented amount of international will and cooperation along with short and medium term hardships. It’s not going to happen is it ?
- Are CO2 levels in the atmosphere increasing?
- Is the Earth's surface temperature getting hotter?
- Are sea temperatures rising?
- Are the ice sheets at the poles receding?
- Is the sea ice less thick that it used to be?
- Are the glaciers in all major mountain regions in recession?
- Is ocean acidity increasing?
- Does the norther hemisphere now have less snow cover in winter?
- Are sea levels rising?
- Are variations in sea levels increasing?
- Has there been and increase in the number of extreme weather events?
When you've done a bit of research and found that the answers to all of the above are positive (in a logical sense, not outcomes), perhaps you should ask yourself, why on earth do I still doubt that this is happening?
The European Commission fears that carmakers in Germany would seek to export old diesel cars removed from German streets under planned trade-off incentives to eastern European countries. Last year, Bulgaria imported more than 100,000 second hand cars from EU countries, more than a third of which were grossly polluting diesels, according to clean mobility group Transport and Environment.
Most politicians don't give a shit and big business is concerned about a PR exercise.
Hopefully all the scientists doing the research are just making it all up for a laugh.
Too many competing interests for governments to address this.