Anyone on here been in touch with the club about doing a climate awareness game next season? Perhaps trying to get fans that live within a 10 mile radius to walk or cycle into a match. I doubt it
Ahead of the game here! I walked to the Valley from Lower Sydenham and halfway back* during one of the train strike days last January. Bet those RMT or ASLEF members taking a day's action had absolutely no idea the impact their strike had on saving the environment!
* was so effing hungry by the time I reached Blackheath Village, I downed a pack of chocolate biscuits and waited for a 202 bus. Five minutes after I boarded, it pissed down for most of the way home.
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
You don’t think the downtrodden poor masses standing by the side of the road watching the rich in their electric cars that you predict might at some point cop the hump and think you know what lets overturn this and have a revolution. Utter utter utter nonsense.
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
Len, I used to think as you do, except for the Bill Gates Conspiracy theory which is utter rubbish. I am now absolutely convinced that climate change is man made and is having a drastic effect on the planet.
The planet's weather has been changing for billions of years, but the pace of change has accelerated enormously since the Industrial Revolution, which had its roots in the UK and the consensus amongst the world's scientists is that it is due to the actions of humans.
CO2 forms in the atmosphere which keeps heat within, it can be useful in that the planet remains warmer than it would be if there were no CO2, however we have reached the point where the amount of CO2 has increased so much, that everywhere is becoming warmer. Warm air can hold more water, so that in some parts of the earth it will drop huge amounts causing floods, it also means that other areas have less rain and there are then droughts.
Climate change has an accumulative effect as the ice caps melt, the seas became warmer and the ocean currents that also drive the world's weather systems become disrupted. The climate of the UK is moderated by the Gulf Stream and we get milder summers and warmer winters than similar countries of the same latitude. If the ocean currents are disrupted, that balance fails and we see more extreme weather.
The rain forests are a major driver of the world's weather systems and the lungs of the planet absorbing CO2 and providing the clouds for rain to fall in other parts of the planet. Trees are being cut down in vast quantities which will then affect carbon storage and the weather patterns are changing.
Any disruption to part of the system has an effect everywhere else and we cannot stand by and continue on the path we are on.
Nature is crucial to the existence of man and we are devastating it at present. Nature cannot adapt quickly enough to make it resilient to the changes that are happening, so many important species are dying out. Man needs nature to survive and the UK is in fact one of the world's most nature depleted countries.
The ULEZ zone is there to stop children dying from the pollution that some vehicles produce, surely that is a good thing, or do you not believe that noxious gases cause lung damage? Have a look at the HoC thread on Boris Johnson, it was he who first thought of the ULEZs.
Anyone on here been in touch with the club about doing a climate awareness game next season? Perhaps trying to get fans that live within a 10 mile radius to walk or cycle into a match. I doubt it
Ahead of the game here! I walked to the Valley from Lower Sydenham and halfway back* during one of the train strike days last January. Bet those RMT or ASLEF members taking a day's action had absolutely no idea the impact their strike had on saving the environment!
* was so effing hungry by the time I reached Blackheath Village, I downed a pack of chocolate biscuits and waited for a 202 bus. Five minutes after I boarded, it pissed down for most of the way home.
The 202 is the don of bus routes in the People’s Republic of South East London.
Considerably less than half of the UK’s rail network is electrified. The remainder can only be used by Diesel trains. All fright is diesel. The intention is to phase out diesel trains by 2040. That’s exactly the sort of example of of things taking too long and not being a priority enough I was looking for. Drastic action is needed right now and the above is an example of something that could be done relatively easily if there was a genuine will. This country is far from being the worst in kicking the can down the road and for inaction. The actual chances of enough being done to stop the climate balance tipping beyond reversal are I think negligible. Future generations or those that are left at least are going to look back on us with anger and contempt. Rightly so.
Considerably less than half of the UK’s rail network is electrified. The remainder can only be used by Diesel trains. All fright is diesel. The intention is to phase out diesel trains by 2040. That’s exactly the sort of example of of things taking too long and not being a priority enough I was looking for. Drastic action is needed right now and the above is an example of something that could be done relatively easily if there was a genuine will. This country is far from being the worst in kicking the can down the road and for inaction. The actual chances of enough being done to stop the climate balance tipping beyond reversal are I think negligible. Future generations or those that are left at least are going to look back on us with anger and contempt. Rightly so.
No! I won't have that. Surely the history books will record that Brexit and JSO protesters were to blame 😉
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
You don’t think the downtrodden poor masses standing by the side of the road watching the rich in their electric cars that you predict might at some point cop the hump and think you know what lets overturn this and have a revolution. Utter utter utter nonsense.
You could say that's already started in a small way by the protests over ulez. The rich can afford to either update to electric cars or carry on driving their polluting cars with the £12.50 per day being pocket change where as normal folk will struggle.
Then you have LTNs where in many parts, the rich have turned their streets into cul de sacs while all the traffic gets pushed onto boundary roads passed some of the poorer parts of society.
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
Len, I used to think as you do, except for the Bill Gates Conspiracy theory which is utter rubbish. I am now absolutely convinced that climate change is man made and is having a drastic effect on the planet.
The planet's weather has been changing for billions of years, but the pace of change has accelerated enormously since the Industrial Revolution, which had its roots in the UK and the consensus amongst the world's scientists is that it is due to the actions of humans.
CO2 forms in the atmosphere which keeps heat within, it can be useful in that the planet remains warmer than it would be if there were no CO2, however we have reached the point where the amount of CO2 has increased so much, that everywhere is becoming warmer. Warm air can hold more water, so that in some parts of the earth it will drop huge amounts causing floods, it also means that other areas have less rain and there are then droughts.
Climate change has an accumulative effect as the ice caps melt, the seas became warmer and the ocean currents that also drive the world's weather systems become disrupted. The climate of the UK is moderated by the Gulf Stream and we get milder summers and warmer winters than similar countries of the same latitude. If the ocean currents are disrupted, that balance fails and we see more extreme weather.
The rain forests are a major driver of the world's weather systems and the lungs of the planet absorbing CO2 and providing the clouds for rain to fall in other parts of the planet. Trees are being cut down in vast quantities which will then affect carbon storage and the weather patterns are changing.
Any disruption to part of the system has an effect everywhere else and we cannot stand by and continue on the path we are on.
Nature is crucial to the existence of man and we are devastating it at present. Nature cannot adapt quickly enough to make it resilient to the changes that are happening, so many important species are dying out. Man needs nature to survive and the UK is in fact one of the world's most nature depleted countries.
The ULEZ zone is there to stop children dying from the pollution that some vehicles produce, surely that is a good thing, or do you not believe that noxious gases cause lung damage? Have a look at the HoC thread on Boris Johnson, it was he who first thought of the ULEZs.
No, you can pay £12.50 and carry on killing children if you can afford it 👍
Len Glover, you are of the age to remember the pea Souper fogs in London right up to the mid to late 60's. The updated factories age helped to limited the worse of the fogs and smog after that period in UK cites.
New York weather has been affected by the mass fires in Canada that blew down the north east side of America for months.
No surprise that certain companies or individuals get involved with the "green" movement for pragmatic or nefarious reasons BUT not to acknowledge that two hundred years since the industrial revolution started in the west and about 100 in China, India etc have caused many issues with climate change appears disingenuous.
Trying to wean off of Oil dependency is going to be difficult as we are finding out with the slowness of the electrical infrastructure for cars in the UK.
The Homeostasis of the earth could cope before the industrial revolution around the world but the ramping up of pollution has seen the Gaia hypothesis of self regulation come under pressure which even the father of Gaia theory, *James Lovelock independent scientist and a genius inventor of the electron capture detector accepted the earth needed help from mankind before his death at 103.
*James Lovelock was born and died on July 26th. Not a lot of people know that !
26/7/1919 -26/7/2022
Sorry to pass on the sad news that there is no Planet B for us to migrate to.
What I'm getting from some is that, in the grand scale of our planets history, there are natural cycles of global warming, which played out over the millennia, humans can't prevent, although we are seriously influencing it in this brief age. I'll call that the Bellamy arguement.
Therein lies his claim that we're trying to solve something that we can't I think, but that only applies over a monumentally long time scale that is hard for any of us to comprehend.
We do know enough to be able to make life bearable now and for future generations of humanity for a long time yet if we do our bit, so that's what we should be doing, not sitting on our arses saying it'll catch up with us all in the end, so why bother, or going out to waste fuel because we're angry about some idiots sitting in the road.
David Bellamy was a good botanist but on this subject he was wrong. His view that glaciers were advancing not retreating was shown to be based on false evidence and he subsequently withdrew the claim.
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
You don’t think the downtrodden poor masses standing by the side of the road watching the rich in their electric cars that you predict might at some point cop the hump and think you know what lets overturn this and have a revolution. Utter utter utter nonsense.
You could say that's already started in a small way by the protests over ulez. The rich can afford to either update to electric cars or carry on driving their polluting cars with the £12.50 per day being pocket change where as normal folk will struggle.
Then you have LTNs where in many parts, the rich have turned their streets into cul de sacs while all the traffic gets pushed onto boundary roads passed some of the poorer parts of society.
A need to differentiate "climate change" from "man made climate change", which is how I interpreted Len's words (not that I agree, but there is a difference between the two).
Not sure if this has already been suggested or discussed here but I feel that a lot of the Just Stop Oil campaign is set up to attract the attention and interest of young people who aren't as likely to be as annoyed or inconvenienced by road closures and disruptions to the tennis. It has a kind of viral guerilla feel to it and seems to be designed to generate more interest and shake off the apathy for the young with its sense of urgency alongside a bit of anarchy.
I reckon they've calculated that in a cost benefit way they can get lots more publicity and interest and have a bigger impact through some controversy and that upsetting other demographics will be worth it overall. That seems like their strategy and I can definitely see it as being more effective than some of the other ones suggested on here by people opposed to their methods.
Who on here will be voting Green at the next election?
Having heard Rachel Reeves yesterday on TV, David Lammy on LBC, and Keir Starmer reportedly saying he "hates tree huggers" I hope that we are all voting Green rather than these Daily Mail types?
Who on here will be voting Green at the next election?
Having heard Rachel Reeves yesterday on TV, David Lammy on LBC, and Keir Starmer reportedly saying he "hates tree huggers" I hope that we are all voting Green rather than these Daily Mail types?
Their policies I think are typical of a party that knows they’ll never be in charge to implement them. I’m not saying I don’t support the philosophy behind them but I’m afraid we live in the real world where things cost money not in the la la land of Green Party politics.
For those that believe in global warming, but deny that humans contribute to it or can do anything about it, just wanted to say that my lunch of gorgonzola cheese sourced from the moon went down a treat.
Many Tory MPs are funded by right wing think tanks with links to the oil industry. They need to keep them sweet to keep the money flowing in.
Groups like Just Stop Oil are funded by individuals and organisations with their own vested interests. The Labour Party is funded by the Trade Unions to a great extent.
Man made Climate Change and net zero ideology have become political aims in their own right. Climate Change is happening but has happened throughout history. That's nature. Man has no influence over nature and weather although it suits business and academic interests to perpetuate the Myth that he does.
Someone needs some education.
There's always one with their head in the sand.
David Bellamy spoke against Man Made Climate Change and was ostracised and removed from the Media as a result. 'Cancelled' in the modern parlance.
Al Gore, Bill Gates and others are funding and using 'Man Made Climate Change' as a means to justify political control and removal of freedom from ordinary people.
There is not enough Lithium for batteries for electric vehicles, as one example, and, furthermore, extraction of what lithium there is can be as enviromentally damaging as coal or gas extraction yet that doesn't get mentioned.
What will happen is that the rich will have their electric cars and sod the mobility of the ordinary people. Hence all this nonsense about 15 minute cities to stop the poor travelling anywhere.
Khan has already succeeded in stopping some of us getting to Charlton.
Len, I used to think as you do, except for the Bill Gates Conspiracy theory which is utter rubbish. I am now absolutely convinced that climate change is man made and is having a drastic effect on the planet.
The planet's weather has been changing for billions of years, but the pace of change has accelerated enormously since the Industrial Revolution, which had its roots in the UK and the consensus amongst the world's scientists is that it is due to the actions of humans.
CO2 forms in the atmosphere which keeps heat within, it can be useful in that the planet remains warmer than it would be if there were no CO2, however we have reached the point where the amount of CO2 has increased so much, that everywhere is becoming warmer. Warm air can hold more water, so that in some parts of the earth it will drop huge amounts causing floods, it also means that other areas have less rain and there are then droughts.
Climate change has an accumulative effect as the ice caps melt, the seas became warmer and the ocean currents that also drive the world's weather systems become disrupted. The climate of the UK is moderated by the Gulf Stream and we get milder summers and warmer winters than similar countries of the same latitude. If the ocean currents are disrupted, that balance fails and we see more extreme weather.
The rain forests are a major driver of the world's weather systems and the lungs of the planet absorbing CO2 and providing the clouds for rain to fall in other parts of the planet. Trees are being cut down in vast quantities which will then affect carbon storage and the weather patterns are changing.
Any disruption to part of the system has an effect everywhere else and we cannot stand by and continue on the path we are on.
Nature is crucial to the existence of man and we are devastating it at present. Nature cannot adapt quickly enough to make it resilient to the changes that are happening, so many important species are dying out. Man needs nature to survive and the UK is in fact one of the world's most nature depleted countries.
The ULEZ zone is there to stop children dying from the pollution that some vehicles produce, surely that is a good thing, or do you not believe that noxious gases cause lung damage? Have a look at the HoC thread on Boris Johnson, it was he who first thought of the ULEZs.
No, you can pay £12.50 and carry on killing children if you can afford it 👍
It's being imposed as a deterrent, seems that it is likely to work.
Who on here will be voting Green at the next election?
Having heard Rachel Reeves yesterday on TV, David Lammy on LBC, and Keir Starmer reportedly saying he "hates tree huggers" I hope that we are all voting Green rather than these Daily Mail types?
I'll be voting for the party that has the best chance of getting rid of the Tory Government, PR needs to be introduced to get a Green Party member elected,
For all those who are saying Man made Climate Change is a thing and any sceptics need to be 'educated'.... I'm not saying I agree with Mr. Catt wholeheartedly but he is so much more qualified than me... and this JSO spokesperson doesn't seem to be a match for him. We need to see and hear both sides of the debate... the fact is that we can't rely on renewables at this time to provide all our energy needs and there is no guarantee that we will ever have that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xohjpMyGYc8&t=313s
And this is the declaration Mr. Catt refers to.... it appears to have many highly educated/qualified people from all over the world as signatories. I stress that I am not necessarily saying that they are correct, just putting it here as some balance seeing as so many have suggested that man made climate change is undeniable. https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/WCD-version-06272215121.pdf
There was a hell’ve a lot of problems back in the olden days before electricity, gas, and the internal combustion engine. Life expectancy for a start was rubbish (but there was nevertheless life, particularly if you made it to five), but better than no life at all. My point is that there was survival with wind, and sail, and water power, less wastefulness, and we now have greater knowledge regarding agriculture, solar energy, battery development, medical science and whatnot. There doesn’t have to be an all or nothing scenario in the future, but it seems to me there needs to be inevitable huge change to all of our lives. If humanity can do that then there is some hope. The biggest enemy is the mindset that flytips, casually discards rubbish, is in denial, is incredibly greedy or simply can’t be bothered. Until we can change our ingrained habits there remains little hope for our children and grandchildren.
And this is the declaration Mr. Catt refers to.... it appears to have many highly educated/qualified people from all over the world as signatories. I stress that I am not necessarily saying that they are correct, just putting it here as some balance seeing as so many have suggested that man made climate change is undeniable. https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/WCD-version-06272215121.pdf
Have a read of who is behind this organisation many of whom have a vested interest in prolonging the use of fossil fuels.
The guess is that there were 4 billion in 1974. There are 8 billion now. Is there a trend here?
This is quite simply the biggest threat to the planet. Trouble is the countries that's population is increasing out of control are non white. So any debate about doing something about it is shouted down as being racist.
For all those who are saying Man made Climate Change is a thing and any sceptics need to be 'educated'.... I'm not saying I agree with Mr. Catt wholeheartedly but he seems much more qualified than me... and this JSO spokesperson doesn't seem to be a match for him. We need to see and hear both sides of the debate... the fact is that we can't rely on renewables at this time to provide all our energy needs and there is no guarantee that we will ever have that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xohjpMyGYc8&t=313s
Mr Catt is not an expert on climate change. He is not trained as a climate scientist and has never had a scientific paper about the issue published in a scientific journal*. His @catandman profile on Twitter describes him as “Physicist, Engineer, Tech Business (rtd), busy. STEM Ambassador”. On LinkedIn he is a “B2B Business Developer”, and encourages visitors to his page to “Check www.eurochannel.org for CV”. That website describes Mr Catt as “a senior partner of EuroChannel”, and “an experienced business manager with a comprehensive record of achievement creating, building and managing international businesses ranging from a $10M T/O European software startup to the taking public of a private global service provider, from invisible to doubled T/O sector leader and a $1B IPO”.
Alas, a copy of Mr Catt’s CV cannot be accessed from the current website for EuroChannel, but a cached version does provide a link. It reveals he has an upper second class Bachelor’s degree in Physics and a Master’s degree in Business Administration. It also indicates he is a Chartered Engineer and a Chartered Physicist (which is awarded by the Institute of Physics, an organisation that accepts the overwhelming evidence for anthropogenic climate change), but his CV does not list any formal experience or qualifications in climate science since he started his career in 1965.
[...]
Similarly, Mr Catt told Mr Tice: “We are at one degree above the coldest it’s been in the last ten thousand years.” He added that, “two degrees cooler than the warmest it’s been in the last eight, ten thousand years, which is the Egyptian Minoan period.” These statements were also untrue, as Figure 1 shows.
Although Mr Catt suggested that he was citing peer-reviewed academic papers, he did not indicate any source. When challenged on Twitter the day after the interview, he tweeted a link to a faked graph that has been circulated by climate change deniers for more than 10 years. The graph purports to show temperature for the last 10,000 years as recorded in a Greenland ice core, and was created for a post in December 2010 on the blog ‘Watts Up With That’, which promotes climate change denial. The graph claims that it is based on data from a paper by Richard Alley titled ‘The Younger Dryas cold interval as viewed from central Greenland’, which was published in the journal Quaternary Science Reviews in January 2000. But this paper could not be the source for the graph because it only analyses data for the period from 10,000 to 16,000 years before 1950.
*he's had three non-peer-reviewed articles on climate change are all he has to his name on the topic.
"There's not enough renewable energy" - again, yes, he's right. But that's got to change; the scientific consensus is that it should change. No-one is suggesting this happens overnight.
So this is someone who is misframing the argument absolutely massively. Who is saying we shut it all down? No one.
"Not the hottest week it's ever been, hotter in Egyptian and Roman periods" - SOURCE PLEASE. What the hell is he on about? How would he know? This is why the phrase on record is used so often. This is a BASELESS claim that makes no sense.
"Has he published any accredited papers?" - GB News take him at his word. However, he has no peer reviewed articles on climate science available, as a quick search of JSTOR and Google Scholar has shown (and the above LSE article mentions). He probably did publish a paper in 1968, in a completely unrelated field, that most GB News viewers won't realise is unrelated.
"I've been in industry" okay right whatever. Irrelevant, too.
Sean's point is that the UK isn't investing in renewables: the Energy Charter he critiques, and correctly mentions that taxpayers in some ways help prop up the fossil fuel industry. He's wrong about "let the market decide" insofar as the infrastructure isn't there, though. Sean is correct that renewables are the cheapest energy source.
Brian Catt goes back to renewables not being strong enough yet and he advocates for nuclear usage, I think. Or says it's viable. I actually agree: nuclear energy would be a palatable alternative. He is WRONG to say it is "complete rubbish" that nuclear would be the cheapest, though.
However, this is because the argument is misframed: Brian is talking about what to do now while Sean is talking about what to do for the future. Thus, GB News have two people talking about different arguments and as they're pitted against each other, but talking about different things, it's very easy to make the claim that Brian is "winning" some sort of "argument".
"There's not enough energy in renewables currently" - yes, we know this! He then rambles about some rubbish.
----------
Okay, there it is. "There is no climate crisis" - Sean has him, GB News will think that Sean is the crackpot that's how far gone their agenda is. Why did I bother typing this as I watched ffs
Comments
I walked to the Valley from Lower Sydenham and halfway back* during one of the train strike days last January.
Bet those RMT or ASLEF members taking a day's action had absolutely no idea the impact their strike had on saving the environment!
* was so effing hungry by the time I reached Blackheath Village, I downed a pack of chocolate biscuits and waited for a 202 bus. Five minutes after I boarded, it pissed down for most of the way home.
The planet's weather has been changing for billions of years, but the pace of change has accelerated enormously since the Industrial Revolution, which had its roots in the UK and the consensus amongst the world's scientists is that it is due to the actions of humans.
CO2 forms in the atmosphere which keeps heat within, it can be useful in that the planet remains warmer than it would be if there were no CO2, however we have reached the point where the amount of CO2 has increased so much, that everywhere is becoming warmer. Warm air can hold more water, so that in some parts of the earth it will drop huge amounts causing floods, it also means that other areas have less rain and there are then droughts.
Climate change has an accumulative effect as the ice caps melt, the seas became warmer and the ocean currents that also drive the world's weather systems become disrupted. The climate of the UK is moderated by the Gulf Stream and we get milder summers and warmer winters than similar countries of the same latitude. If the ocean currents are disrupted, that balance fails and we see more extreme weather.
The rain forests are a major driver of the world's weather systems and the lungs of the planet absorbing CO2 and providing the clouds for rain to fall in other parts of the planet. Trees are being cut down in vast quantities which will then affect carbon storage and the weather patterns are changing.
Any disruption to part of the system has an effect everywhere else and we cannot stand by and continue on the path we are on.
Nature is crucial to the existence of man and we are devastating it at present. Nature cannot adapt quickly enough to make it resilient to the changes that are happening, so many important species are dying out. Man needs nature to survive and the UK is in fact one of the world's most nature depleted countries.
The ULEZ zone is there to stop children dying from the pollution that some vehicles produce, surely that is a good thing, or do you not believe that noxious gases cause lung damage? Have a look at the HoC thread on Boris Johnson, it was he who first thought of the ULEZs.
Then you have LTNs where in many parts, the rich have turned their streets into cul de sacs while all the traffic gets pushed onto boundary roads passed some of the poorer parts of society.
New York weather has been affected by the mass fires in Canada that blew down the north east side of America for months.
No surprise that certain companies or individuals get involved with the "green" movement for pragmatic or nefarious reasons BUT not to acknowledge that two hundred years since the industrial revolution started in the west and about 100 in China, India etc have caused many issues with climate change appears disingenuous.
Trying to wean off of Oil dependency is going to be difficult as we are finding out with the slowness of the electrical infrastructure for cars in the UK.
The Homeostasis of the earth could cope before the industrial revolution around the world but the ramping up of pollution has seen the Gaia hypothesis of self regulation come under pressure which even the father of Gaia theory, *James Lovelock independent scientist and a genius inventor of the electron capture detector accepted the earth needed help from mankind before his death at 103.
*James Lovelock was born and died on July 26th. Not a lot of people know that !
26/7/1919 -26/7/2022
Sorry to pass on the sad news that there is no Planet B for us to migrate to.
Have a nice day.
I'm also very bored, of people from the surrounding counties thinking they have a right to drive in with polluting cars and kill the poorest Londoners
I claim the assist 👍
You were 16/1 with that reply the same price as Curbishley !
Therein lies his claim that we're trying to solve something that we can't I think, but that only applies over a monumentally long time scale that is hard for any of us to comprehend.
We do know enough to be able to make life bearable now and for future generations of humanity for a long time yet if we do our bit, so that's what we should be doing, not sitting on our arses saying it'll catch up with us all in the end, so why bother, or going out to waste fuel because we're angry about some idiots sitting in the road.
@LenGlover what shape is the earth??
I reckon they've calculated that in a cost benefit way they can get lots more publicity and interest and have a bigger impact through some controversy and that upsetting other demographics will be worth it overall. That seems like their strategy and I can definitely see it as being more effective than some of the other ones suggested on here by people opposed to their methods.
Having heard Rachel Reeves yesterday on TV, David Lammy on LBC, and Keir Starmer reportedly saying he "hates tree huggers" I hope that we are all voting Green rather than these Daily Mail types?
https://policy.greenparty.org.uk/our-policies/long-term-goals/energy/
https://clintel.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/WCD-version-06272215121.pdf
My point is that there was survival with wind, and sail, and water power, less wastefulness, and we now have greater knowledge regarding agriculture, solar energy, battery development, medical science and whatnot.
There doesn’t have to be an all or nothing scenario in the future, but it seems to me there needs to be inevitable huge change to all of our lives. If humanity can do that then there is some hope.
The biggest enemy is the mindset that flytips, casually discards rubbish, is in denial, is incredibly greedy or simply can’t be bothered. Until we can change our ingrained habits there remains little hope for our children and grandchildren.
There are 8 billion now.
Is there a trend here?
https://www.desmog.com/climate-intelligence-foundation-clintel/
Trouble is the countries that's population is increasing out of control are non white.
So any debate about doing something about it is shouted down as being racist.
Mr Catt is not an expert on climate change. He is not trained as a climate scientist and has never had a scientific paper about the issue published in a scientific journal*. His @catandman profile on Twitter describes him as “Physicist, Engineer, Tech Business (rtd), busy. STEM Ambassador”. On LinkedIn he is a “B2B Business Developer”, and encourages visitors to his page to “Check www.eurochannel.org for CV”. That website describes Mr Catt as “a senior partner of EuroChannel”, and “an experienced business manager with a comprehensive record of achievement creating, building and managing international businesses ranging from a $10M T/O European software startup to the taking public of a private global service provider, from invisible to doubled T/O sector leader and a $1B IPO”.
Alas, a copy of Mr Catt’s CV cannot be accessed from the current website for EuroChannel, but a cached version does provide a link. It reveals he has an upper second class Bachelor’s degree in Physics and a Master’s degree in Business Administration. It also indicates he is a Chartered Engineer and a Chartered Physicist (which is awarded by the Institute of Physics, an organisation that accepts the overwhelming evidence for anthropogenic climate change), but his CV does not list any formal experience or qualifications in climate science since he started his career in 1965.
[...]
Similarly, Mr Catt told Mr Tice: “We are at one degree above the coldest it’s been in the last ten thousand years.” He added that, “two degrees cooler than the warmest it’s been in the last eight, ten thousand years, which is the Egyptian Minoan period.” These statements were also untrue, as Figure 1 shows.
Although Mr Catt suggested that he was citing peer-reviewed academic papers, he did not indicate any source. When challenged on Twitter the day after the interview, he tweeted a link to a faked graph that has been circulated by climate change deniers for more than 10 years. The graph purports to show temperature for the last 10,000 years as recorded in a Greenland ice core, and was created for a post in December 2010 on the blog ‘Watts Up With That’, which promotes climate change denial. The graph claims that it is based on data from a paper by Richard Alley titled ‘The Younger Dryas cold interval as viewed from central Greenland’, which was published in the journal Quaternary Science Reviews in January 2000. But this paper could not be the source for the graph because it only analyses data for the period from 10,000 to 16,000 years before 1950.
*he's had three non-peer-reviewed articles on climate change are all he has to his name on the topic.
---------------------------------As for the interview above: "85% of the world's energy comes from fossil fuels" - fine. It's about 82% as of June 2023 - source: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/renewables-growth-did-not-dent-fossil-fuel-dominance-2022-statistical-review-2023-06-25/ Same goes for his claims re the UK. There might well be a logistical challenge in replacing all this. But that's why targets are spread over many years.
"There's not enough renewable energy" - again, yes, he's right. But that's got to change; the scientific consensus is that it should change. No-one is suggesting this happens overnight.
So this is someone who is misframing the argument absolutely massively. Who is saying we shut it all down? No one.
"Not the hottest week it's ever been, hotter in Egyptian and Roman periods" - SOURCE PLEASE. What the hell is he on about? How would he know? This is why the phrase on record is used so often. This is a BASELESS claim that makes no sense.
"Has he published any accredited papers?" - GB News take him at his word. However, he has no peer reviewed articles on climate science available, as a quick search of JSTOR and Google Scholar has shown (and the above LSE article mentions). He probably did publish a paper in 1968, in a completely unrelated field, that most GB News viewers won't realise is unrelated.
"I've been in industry" okay right whatever. Irrelevant, too.
Sean's point is that the UK isn't investing in renewables: the Energy Charter he critiques, and correctly mentions that taxpayers in some ways help prop up the fossil fuel industry. He's wrong about "let the market decide" insofar as the infrastructure isn't there, though. Sean is correct that renewables are the cheapest energy source.
Brian Catt goes back to renewables not being strong enough yet and he advocates for nuclear usage, I think. Or says it's viable. I actually agree: nuclear energy would be a palatable alternative. He is WRONG to say it is "complete rubbish" that nuclear would be the cheapest, though.
However, this is because the argument is misframed: Brian is talking about what to do now while Sean is talking about what to do for the future. Thus, GB News have two people talking about different arguments and as they're pitted against each other, but talking about different things, it's very easy to make the claim that Brian is "winning" some sort of "argument".
"There's not enough energy in renewables currently" - yes, we know this! He then rambles about some rubbish.
----------
Okay, there it is. "There is no climate crisis" - Sean has him, GB News will think that Sean is the crackpot that's how far gone their agenda is. Why did I bother typing this as I watched ffs