A little truth for a change.

[John Brown]

I’d still love to know the answer to my question.
I understand some people don’t believe all the scientists etc no matter that fact that effectively all of them agree (balance in the media has had the negative effect of making people think that opinions are split 50/50 as an interviewer will have one climate change scientist debating one climate denier scientist without mentioning that that first scientist represents 99.9% of scientists and scientists b represents .1%)
But what I struggle to understand is if you disbelieve all of that, what makes you believe some random guy on YouTube?
@philpascoe ?

Confirmation bias.
Of which we are probably all guilty to a degree, but when flying in the face of such overwhelming scientific consensus, random tubers and fossil fuel shills are your hunting grounds.

 

[Cooper]

Ar

As far as I'm concerned, we're all missing the Big Question: if the predicted "climate catastrophe" does indeed come about, would it actually be A Bad Thing? The world population of **** "Sapiens" is manifestly too big, and as a species our behaviour is out of control and unsupportable, so would the reduction of our numbers by 90%, for example, really be a catastrophe for the other creatures condemned to share the planet with us? Obviously, the wiping out of our entire species would probably be the optimum result, but perhaps a few survivors might just learn a valuable lesson as they struggle to survive the results of their own folly..

Are volunteering?

 

[Cooper]

 

[John Brown]

View attachment 178178

That's very good, is it a Banksy?

 

[RobinBHM]

That's very good, is it a Banksy?

maybe its a "Cooper"

 

[Cobbs]

Confirmation bias.
Of which we are probably all guilty to a degree, but when flying in the face of such overwhelming scientific consensus, random tubers and fossil fuel shills are your hunting grounds.

"Tubers" - I like that, makes me think of Mr Potato-Head...

 

[DrPhill]

 

[Jacob]

View attachment 178207

I think this is what worries the sceptics - everything which needs doing is generally a bit too "woke" for the poor things!
It's like ULEZ on steroids, plus vegetarianism and lots of cycling!
The un-woke agenda would presumably be to do nothing, let it rip and rely on neoliberal free markets, which seems to be what we have currently; trading in carbon credits being a very ominous portent.
We are all doomed, including the carbon speculators, who won't be able to buy their way out of it.

 

[DrPhill]

I think this is what worries the sceptics - everything which needs doing is generally a bit too "woke" for the poor things!
It's like ULEZ on steroids, plus vegetarianism and lots of cycling!
The un-woke agenda would presumably be to do nothing, let it rip and rely on neoliberal free markets, which seems to be what we have currently; trading in carbon credits being a very ominous portent.
We are all doomed, including the carbon speculators, who won't be able to buy their way out of it.

Too true; we have this highly artificial political 'war on woke' which aims to stop the 'woke extremists' and now includes environmental awareness. I have no problem with this inclusion - I have been called woke several times and I take it as a compliment.

"Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination".[1][2] Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as racial injustice, sexism, and denial of LGBT rights. Woke has also been used as shorthand for some ideas of the American Left involving identity politics and social justice, such as white privilege and reparations for slavery in the United States.[3][4][5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

Woke in the UK now includes anything the far right dislikes..... also fine by me.

 

[Filament]

The most amazing one is the 15 minute cities - a concept that essentially says ‘wouldn’t it be good if most people could walk to the shops’ that has somehow been sold to those with slightly boiled heads as ‘the WEF/Bill Gates/George Soros are going to fine-imprison you for leaving your house/designated local area’
Often they’ll try and convince you by telling you to wake up/open your eyes/stop being sheeple.
Which is ironic.

 

[Filament]

In other news, this thread is very encouraging compared to a number of similar ones I’ve seen other forums recently. Top work all.

 

[artie]

The most amazing one is the 15 minute cities - a concept that essentially says ‘wouldn’t it be good if most people could walk to the shops’ that has somehow been sold to those with slightly boiled heads as ‘the WEF/Bill Gates/George Soros are going to fine-imprison you for leaving your house/designated local area’
Often they’ll try and convince you by telling you to wake up/open your eyes/stop being sheeple.
Which is ironic.

Nowt, as they say, wrong with the idea of a 15 minute city, if that is how you want to live.

Not everyone wants to live that way.

 

[Filament]

Nowt, as they say, wrong with the idea of a 15 minute city, if that is how you want to live.

Not everyone wants to live that way.

Notice the word could.
I didn’t say you HAD to walk to the shops.

What do you mean by ‘live that way’? What do you think 15 minute cities mean?

 

[deema]

Well, interesting, I like to follow the science which I know gets in the way of the jingoism of blaming CO2 for everything. What I struggle with the most is the lack of interest in actually determining the exact effect of CO2.

We are with the present perspective that CO2 is the bad enemy masking the simple fact that it is now no longer the main or indeed even close to being the primary driver of global warming. It’s about as sensible tackling CO2 emissions as blood letting for a fever was in medieval medicine and just as ineffective. In fact the deluded focus is likely to be the cause of our species demise.

 

[artie]

Notice the word could.
I didn’t say you HAD to walk to the shops.

What do you mean by ‘live that way’? What do you think 15 minute cities mean?

I've been wrong before, but I'd hazard a guess, nay, I'd bet that a 15 minute city would be an urban area.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Woke in the UK now includes anything the far right dislikes..... also fine by me.

Far right politicises the issue.

For many "woke" is now used as an insult to mock "overrighteous liberalism". In this pejorative sense, woke means "following an intolerant and moralising ideology".

I have some sympathy with the view despite identifying myself firmly with the climate change camp.

 

[Jacob]

Well, interesting, I like to follow the science which I know gets in the way of the jingoism of blaming CO2 for everything. What I struggle with the most is the lack of interest in actually determining the exact effect of CO2.

We are with the present perspective that CO2 is the bad enemy masking the simple fact that it is now no longer the main or indeed even close to being the primary driver of global warming. It’s about as sensible tackling CO2 emissions as blood letting for a fever was in medieval medicine and just as ineffective. In fact the deluded focus is likely to be the cause of our species demise.

You need to follow the science. You seem completely out of touch.
Where did you pick up the odd idea that CO2 "....is now no longer the main or indeed even close to being the primary driver of global warming"? This is nonsense.
"...determining the exact effect of CO2" is the central topic of climate change science, along with looking at the sources of CO2 emissions. Both intensively researched and of major interest to all involved

 

[RobinBHM]

This is a difficult thread to contribute to because politics and climate change are so interlinked.

There is a huge amount of funding directed towards research scientists and media, making it very hard to do independent research.

One thing we do know is that human population has grown from 2.5b to 7.5b in under a 100 years. So I start from the basis that man has influenced climate

 

[Jacob]

This is a difficult thread to contribute to because politics and climate change are so interlinked.

They are interlinked because the CC necessary action has to be top down from governments globally.

There is a huge amount of funding directed towards research scientists and media, making it very hard to do independent research.

Wrong. A very odd thing to say - it obviously makes it easier to do independent research.
There is no profit to be made from climate change research, how else would it be possible?

n.b. population growth isn't the main issue, most of excess CO2 generation comes from the "first world".

https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/mythbusters

 

[RobinBHM]

simple fact that it is now no longer the main or indeed even close to being the primary driver of global warming

I don’t quite understand this as it’s widely stated by scientists that it is the main driver.

Eg “CO2 produced by human activities is the largest contributor to global warming. By 2020, its concentration in the atmosphere had risen to 48% above its pre-industrial level (before 1750).

Other greenhouse gases are emitted by human activities in smaller quantities.”
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/climat... human,human activities in smaller quantities.


Here is the view that supports what you say:

“Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruittsaid Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.”

But Scott Pruitt has very close connections to Koch brothers
https://www.theguardian.com/environ... Scott,attorney general's office on Wednesday.

I would be most interested to learn what leads you to believe CO2 is no longer the main driver.