Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[dutchie]

Far out, 159 pages of dribble.
Lets make is simple so kiddies can understand.
Is Global Warming unstoppable?

• A. YES - prove it, you need time (100's of years)
• B. NO - prove it, you need time (100's of years)

So unless someone has a couple of earths to test theories on, as that what they are, modelling is just a theory and a time machine, no one can within any % of accuracy answer the question within the next 100 years.

So lets look at again.
Is the earth warming?

• Yes/Maybe/No. The earth temperature and sea levels have been constantly changing.

So lets just agree the the climate is changing. Tick

So next question.
Has man contributed to the changes, ie accelerated them?

• Well I am no scientist but again will use kiddie logic to see if there is a simple answer.
• What do trees do? They provide oxygen and capture carbon out of the air. They are essentially the earths lungs, without them, all life on the planet is f---ked.
• What has man done over the last say 100 years, removed 50% > of the earth capacity to breath.
• And in the same time man has dug up oil and coal and burnt is, releasing carbon in various forms back into the atmosphere. Again, I don't need to get into a discussion whether co2 is causing climate change.
• And what do we know about forest, they also create weather, including rain fall.

So while all you kiddies and the stupid arse govnuts want to point figures there is such a simple solution that doesn't require huge debate.

PLANT MORE F---KING TREES, LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS MORE

And if our govnuts want to continue to promote coal, then fine, just make the miners and produces plant TREES.

And if that doesn't provide an adequate solution to the problem, I have one more suggestion.

KILLS THE PARASITES THAT ARE DISTROYING THE PLANET - HUMANS

Great post. Agree 100%

 

[Knobby22]

Great post. Agree 100%

I thought it showed a complete misunderstanding of the scientific method to create a simplistic statement that let the polluters off the hook.

 

[dutchie]

I thought it showed a complete misunderstanding of the scientific method to create a simplistic statement that let the polluters off the hook.

Climate change is no longer (if it ever was) scientific - it's political.

 

[rederob]

Climate change is no longer (if it ever was) scientific - it's political.

Go and fight the bushfires and come back to us on that thought.

 

[orr]

24 seconds of Derick and Clive (aka Cook and Moore) on You Tube... To lift the mood.
Just google 'Derick and Clive Dutch'
Harsh Dutchie?? well maybe, but you've set yourself up for it.

 

[Knobby22]

Interesting:

Washington: James Murdoch has accused his family's global media empire of promoting climate denialism in a stunning attack on News Corporation's climate coverage.

The comments represent a rare public dispute among members of the Murdoch family about News Corp's editorial direction.

Rupert Murdoch flanked by sons Lachlan (left) and James. Creditoug Peters

They come as the bushfire crisis ravaging Australia has focused attention on the climate coverage in News Corp mastheads such as The Australian, The Daily Telegraph and the Herald Sun.

“Kathryn and James’ views on climate are well established and their frustration with some of the News Corp and Fox coverage of the topic is also well known,” a spokesperson for Murdoch and his wife told The Daily Beast website.

"They are particularly disappointed with the ongoing denial among the news outlets in Australia given obvious evidence to the contrary.”

 

[basilio]

The Guardian picked up on the story and gave it some details

They also analysed the coverage of the bushfires The Australian and other Murdoch papers were offering the public.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...athers-news-outlets-for-climate-crisis-denial

The Australian says it accepts climate science, so why does it give a platform to 'outright falsehoods'?
News Corp’s paper says its journalists report the facts but critics say it publishes misleading claims

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...oes-it-give-a-platform-to-outright-falsehoods

 

[IFocus]

Climate change is no longer (if it ever was) scientific - it's political.

There was actually bi-partisan agreement on the science regarding climate change in the US, then vested interests (fossil fuels aka big money) took charge and the Republicans took the money and turned the whole thing into a political issue using the same tactics as tobacco etc.

They also gave voice / cover to fringe BS and extreme right wing obfuscation much of which you see turn up on these threads.

it was a political savoir for the Republicans who were looking down the barrel of a diminishing white voter base so much so Abbot and Co (Andrew Robb aka O2 thief) brought it to Australia and also turned it into a vote winner for their base.

None of the above had any thing to do with science SFA......nothing it was all about politics and winning.

Also note the scumbags did the tobacco thing and accused those that accepted the science of exactly their own BS.

Now before the usual apologists turn with some vague obscure comment made by some obscure feminist, or a protester holding a placade thats represents no one, or some dingbat so called fringe scientist but is associated with climate science a point to note, the UK didn't do any of this because the Tories didn't have to and note they actually followed the science.

Yes its political so long as vested interests fund scumbags to do their dirty work and ding bat foot soldiers (aka fools) follow.

BTW Dutchie not having a go at you.

 

[dutchie]

24 seconds of Derick and Clive (aka Cook and Moore) on You Tube... To lift the mood.
Just google 'Derick and Clive Dutch'
Harsh Dutchie?? well maybe, but you've set yourself up for it.

Catchy tune. I use to watch Cook and Moore on TV - very funny.

 

[wayneL]

Go and fight the bushfires and come back to us on that thought.

Despite you being a curmudgeon, I did give you credit for a modicum of critical thinking skills, even if completely polluted by politics.

I now withdraw that thought unreservedly.

 

[wayneL]

And on a lighter note:

 

[sptrawler]

Interesting article in the weekend AFR today, we can get to zero emissions, it is a good read for those interested.
https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-a...-expensive-but-not-impossible-20200116-p53s7d

 

[basilio]

Interesting article in the weekend AFR today, we can get to zero emissions, it is a good read for those interested.
https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-a...-expensive-but-not-impossible-20200116-p53s7d

I couldn't access Saul Griffiths AFR story.However there is a very good You Tube presentation which tells the story of what we need to do and what it will require if we are to have any chance of containing global warming to a liveable degree.



(Doesn't this all make one wish we started this 25 years ago ?)

 

[basilio]

One of the interesting things about Saul Griffiths presentation above is the focus on Industry leading the charge and the changes to address CC. This guy is most definitely not your average garden commie. But he understands what has to be done and recognizes that the business community have to be the drivers.

Explains, I think, why AFR ran his story.

 

[basilio]

Saul Griffiths analysis on Mass electrification and Decarbonisation of the US economy.
The Green New Deal: The enormous opportunity in shooting for the moon.
Decarbonizing with massive electrification will bring about a new American abundance.

 

[moXJO]

Saul Griffiths analysis on Mass electrification and Decarbonisation of the US economy.
The Green New Deal: The enormous opportunity in shooting for the moon.
Decarbonizing with massive electrification will bring about a new American abundance.

I think this will eventually be implemented. Not because of the environmental need but more to reinvigorate economies of the world. A lot of the old jobs are gone. This is a transition that will give capitalism a shot in the arm.

 

[moXJO]

Interesting:

Washington: James Murdoch has accused his family's global media empire of promoting climate denialism in a stunning attack on News Corporation's climate coverage.

The comments represent a rare public dispute among members of the Murdoch family about News Corp's editorial direction.

Rupert Murdoch flanked by sons Lachlan (left) and James. Creditoug Peters

They come as the bushfire crisis ravaging Australia has focused attention on the climate coverage in News Corp mastheads such as The Australian, The Daily Telegraph and the Herald Sun.

“Kathryn and James’ views on climate are well established and their frustration with some of the News Corp and Fox coverage of the topic is also well known,” a spokesperson for Murdoch and his wife told The Daily Beast website.

"They are particularly disappointed with the ongoing denial among the news outlets in Australia given obvious evidence to the contrary.”

I think blaming the bushfires primarily on CC is a load of bull. The whole thing was hijacked by the CC mob.

 

[Knobby22]

I think blaming the bushfires primarily on CC is a load of bull. The whole thing was hijacked by the CC mob.

We had the 8 average hottest days in recorded history for Australia over the last two months.
Of the other two days of recorded history heat records, one was broken the previous year.

You can't say the heat is irrelevant with relation to bushfire intensity.

The truth is the hijacking is the truth by the Newscorp press.

That press will say we should not talk about the elephant in the room while the bushfires are occurring and anyway it's the Greens fault.

In the UK they represent the opposite side and supported the Tory climate change action which included shutting down the unionised coal mines.

Quite frankly, we are not that dumb as a country to fall for the two card trick and I think the Murdoch press will begin modifying their stance.

 

[moXJO]

We had the 8 average hottest days in recorded history for Australia over the last two months.
Of the other two days of recorded history heat records, one was broken the previous year.

You can't say the heat is irrelevant with relation to bushfire intensity.

The truth is the hijacking is the truth by the Newscorp press.

That press will say we should not talk about the elephant in the room while the bushfires are occurring and anyway it's the Greens fault.

In the UK they represent the opposite side and supported the Tory climate change action which included shutting down the unionised coal mines.

Quite frankly, we are not that dumb as a country to fall for the two card trick and I think the Murdoch press will begin modifying their stance.

Since the method of taking temperature has changed which is what?
100 years?

Every previous report and investigation has shown management as the problem. To say it's primarily CC is more b.s then anything Murdoch has to say. Factors of CC have definitely contributed. But the way it's being framed is b.s..

 

[Knobby22]

It's both, as you say.
Pretending it's not is wrong. I'm with James Murdoch.