Jump to content

Global Warming


legov

How certain are you that Global Warming is man-made?  

132 members have voted

  1. 1. How certain are you that Global Warming is man-made?

    • Certain
      34
    • Likely
      49
    • Not Likely
      34
    • No way
      17

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

On 31/12/2019 at 22:03, Genie said:

This winter has been ridiculously warm. I remember 2 frosty mornings back in November time, last week or so has been 9-11 degC which is silly.

Ten years ago when I first moved into a house of my own my boiler broke and I went the ENTIRE winter with no heating in my house.

That winter was **** freezing. It hit -12 at times.

This year I think I've scraped my car twice so far :D

 

(Yes I know this isn't evidence of global warming in isolation. It just annoys me :D )

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

Koala's make shit firefighters though.  

The trick is to keep them damp whilst you use them to beat out the flames. They’re ok then, but still not as effective as a platypus.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

The trick is to keep them damp whilst you use them to beat out the flames. They’re ok then, but still not as effective as a platypus.

 

Tail or Bill first? 

Or;

I'm surprised Platypus's can lift Koalas. 🤔

Edited by lapal_fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

Tail or Bill first? 

Or;

I'm surprised Platypus's can lift Koalas. 🤔

Nail the bill to your broomstick, use the tail as a beater.

To be slightly serious for a mo, just saw a video clip of people up an icy mountain in New Zealand with reduced visibility due to smoke from Australia. Saying they can smell the burning. Geographically, that the equivalent of fires in Greece or northern Turkey impacting your walk up Ben Nevis.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

:(

Quote

Antarctica logs hottest temperature on record with a reading of 18.3C

A new record set so soon after the previous record of 17.5C in March 2015 is a sign warming in Antarctica is happening much faster than global average

Antarctica has logged its hottest temperature on record, with an Argentinian research station thermometer reading 18.3C, beating the previous record by 0.8C.

The reading, taken at Esperanza on the northern tip of the continent’s peninsula, beats Antarctica’s previous record of 17.5C, set in March 2015.

A tweet from Argentina’s meteorological agency on Friday revealed the record. The station’s data goes back to 1961

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/07/antarctica-logs-hottest-temperature-on-record-with-a-reading-of-183c

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Xann said:

Ah, just the weather though innit.

Well yes it is, one storm is just weather. The sooner people stop referring to individual events in relation to climate change, the sooner people might cotton on what climate actually is and how it is changing.

There are all sorts of factors involved in a record number of flood alerts, some of them have no relation to climate change at all. Improved "flood defences" in some places will cause more flooding elsewhere for example

Using individual events isn't helpful in the debate

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Using individual events isn't helpful in the debate

Tell you what isn't helpful in a debate. Talking shit.

They keep coming these records? More than ever and at an ever increasing pace.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Xann said:

Tell you what isn't helpful in a debate. Talking shit.

They keep coming these records? More than ever and at an ever increasing pace.

 

I'm not talking shit

This post is at least veering into the direction of climate though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we don't want to fall into the trap of claiming that any individual storm is *caused* by climate change, because it probably isn't true, cannot be proven, and risks reducing credibility, it probably is worth taking advantage of the fact that the public pay more attention to the climate during extreme weather events.

Floods are important opportunities to raise awareness that a] mitigation only gets you so far, b] one of the most obvious consequences of climate change on the average man on the street is going to be its effect on insurance, and c] some of the land management practices encouraged or tolerated by the government make both climate change and flooding worse (eg burning peat moorland for grouse shooting, as George Monbiot pointed out in a good article in the Guardian over the weekend):

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Tell you what isn't helpful in a debate. Talking shit.

They keep coming these records? More than ever and at an ever increasing pace.

 

Climate change is one thing. Individual events like Australian fires or Flooding is not necessarily and obvioulsy a direct follow up to a very real phenomenon of a changing climate.

Yes, these might be correlated (and often are!), but there are various different factors so a direct correlation should be made be scientists and statisticians. Unfortunately, the correlation is often made by media who often equate flooding with Mr Smith driving his diesel VW to work. 

I think what @bickster is suggesting, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that people are using individual events, regardless of real reasons for those, to drive a certain narrative, but these can often be opposed by simple research by climate change deniers. This in turn goes against the whole point of properly  discussing the issue of how we should live on this planet to not mess it up even further. 

Edited by Mic09
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

Climate change is one thing. Individual events like Australian fires or Flooding is not necessarily and obvioulsy a direct follow up to a very real phenomenon of a changing climate.

Yes, these might be correlated (and often are!), but there are various different factors so a direct correlation should be made be scientists and statisticians. Unfortunately, the correlation is often made by media who often equate flooding with Mr Smith driving his diesel VW to work. 

I think what @bickster is suggesting, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that people are using individual events, regardless of real reasons for those, to drive a certain narrative, but these can often be opposed by simple research by climate change deniers. This in turn goes against the whole point of properly  discussing the issue of how we should live on this planet to not mess it up even further. 

I think anyone suggesting that the worsening Australian fire season is not necessarily a follow-up to climate change would be on pretty weak ground. The relationship is clearer than it is with regard to flooding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

I think what @bickster is suggesting, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that people are using individual events, regardless of real reasons for those, to drive a certain narrative, but these can often be opposed by simple research by climate change deniers. This in turn goes against the whole point of properly  discussing the issue of how we should live on this planet to not mess it up even further. 

Did people read not Cummings' writings that @snowychap linked?

It's about how you address your audience.

How did we get Brexit? When it's rationally debated it's beyond ridiculous, actually suicidal for the UK.

It was done with unthinking emotive hits, ie there's a million Turks coming!

The debate that came afterwards proved the Turk invasion was absolute bollocks, but it didn't matter.

 

Though my post is challenging and immediately emotive for the casual reader, a scroll back through the pages for those that can be bothered has links to other resources.

 

There's also some clueless right wing shit that's just opinion from other posters :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think anyone suggesting that the worsening Australian fire season is not necessarily a follow-up to climate change would be on pretty weak ground. The relationship is clearer than it is with regard to flooding.

Again, you are correct, but when passing judgement on these events we need to have the full picture of what is going on.

For example, here is the first article I found from the telegraph (I am confident there are better sources out there) :

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/australia-burning-bushfires-bad/

Quote

Has climate change caused the fires? 

Bushfires are a regular feature in Australia’s calendar - often triggered by natural causes such as lightning strikes - and cannot be blamed on climate change or rising greenhouse gas emissions alone.

But experts say that the changing climate is key to understanding the ferocity of this years blazes - hotter, drier conditions are making the country’s fire season longer and much more dangerous. 

I can only assume that other factors such as rising population and carelessness in throwing out cigarettes etc might have played a part too - which is not a direct effect of a changing climate.

I 100% agree with you - but often events such as floods are blamed on climate change while it is not necessarily so. Hence the reason why we need to have a good understanding of what is exactly going on rather than jumping to conclusions based on a limited picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mic09 I think we're very much in agreement, and people should be careful not to say things that the evidence doesn't support. However, I think from a science communication perspective, we have to accept that people will naturally be most concerned about climate change during dramatic climate events, and be ready and willing to capitalise on that concern as it arises. So yes, we don't want to go beyond the evidence, but we also certainly don't want the Scott Morrison 'now isn't the time to be talking about climate change' type comments either, which are objectively more harmful IMO.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â