Global warming - what global warming

[Macky]

Explain how the UN benefit then. There are plenty of better funded projects than the IPCC for scientists to get involved in.

I'm not blindly following anything I have spent the last 2 years reading around the subject and have made my mind up. Especially given the data from ice cores on atmospheric CO2 which is clear, hard fact taken from 1000's of samples across hundreds of points across.

I think the 4th IPCC report is pretty unequivocal, if you can provide some material which says atmospheric CO2 levels are not rising I'll read it evaluate it and if it stacks up I'll change my mind.

The IPCC is an unelected, unaccountable political body and I read recently that even they admit that global average temperatures have not fallen or risen for the last 10 years despite an increase in atmospheric CO2 levels.

The whole thing just stinks of political manoeuvering & scaremongery to me.

There's no doubt that there has been climate change, I just have not seen any convincing evidence that CO2 levels are the cause of it.

Also, if CO2 levels are the cause how does somebody getting rich making a fortune trading carbon credits going to make a blind bit of difference?

 

[Dickovforengland!]

or what about, everybody takes global warming seriously, and manages to reverse the effects and sends the world into the next ice age.
It is then discovered that global warming occurs naturally to prevent ice ages happening.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_topic2.pdf

Check out page 4, in the last 10000 years atmospheric CO2 fluctuates between about 260 and 280 parts per million. From 1800 to 2000 it went from 280 to over 375 if that isn't a step change in the rate of increase I don't know what is. Its still increasing we could go well over 500 ppm if we don't change our habits.

Add on to that some positive feedback loops like the North Polar ice disappearing reducing the amount of reflected sunlight and it doesn't look great. Also unchecked its possible the natural ecosystem will become a natural CO2 producer one of the reasons being the sea cannot absorb much more CO2.

Despite that, lets assume we do manage to see CO2 levels plumetting back towards 260. We can start burning stuff and filling the atmosphere with Sulphur Hexafluride which has about 23,900 x the Greenhouse effect of CO2. That should heat things up again.

It would be a very nice thing to worry about CO2 levels dropping.

 

[Steven]

Mercury is closer to the Sun by about the same distance it has pretty much no atmosphere and is about about 40C cooler than Venus. Venus being twice the distance from the Sun than Mercury recieves 1/4 of the energy from the Sun per square metre.

The argument isn't over simplistic, this planet's weather patterns will change significantly in my life time without serious action against climate change.

Show me. I want a nice simple graph that does the direct correlation between CO2 levels and mean temperature in the same way as the graph for sunspot activity and mean temperature. :icon_wink

 

[MKFox]

I used to teach scuba diving at the Wigston pool, and you would not believe what we used to see in there.

http://www.break.com/index/embarrasing_hot_tub_accident.html

 

[Dickovforengland!]

The IPCC is an unelected, unaccountable political body and I read recently that even they admit that global average temperatures have not fallen or risen for the last 10 years despite an increase in atmospheric CO2 levels.

The whole thing just stinks of political manoeuvering & scaremongery to me.

There's no doubt that there has been climate change, I just have not seen any convincing evidence that CO2 levels are the cause of it.

Also, if CO2 levels are the cause how does somebody getting rich making a fortune trading carbon credits going to make a blind bit of difference?

The UK government is electable and accountable body but that has no bearing on whether I trust them. The IPCC are open to peer review in scientific journals.

In the last 10 years volcanic and solar activity should have had a cooling effect on the planet. Not observed. Macky have you read the the whole of the 4th report? It is long but I can't understand how someone could read the whole thing and not pick up the link between CO2 and global warming over the past 200 years and the future projections.

The idea of carbon trading is that industries have less units to trade therefore enforcing reduction of emissions over time. Consumer pressure on companies not to release carbon units on to the market could further reduce emissions.

As far as the planet goes Carbon Trading may or may not have a significant effect but other initiatives such as investment in renewables, nuclear power, personal awareness in everyday life, global population reduction will. IF global political opinion is aligned.

 

[Dickovforengland!]

Show me. I want a nice simple graph that does the direct correlation between CO2 levels and mean temperature in the same way as the graph for sunspot activity and mean temperature. :icon_wink

I've posted the link about 3 times Section 1 is called Changes in Climate and their effect or something like that and Section 2 is causes.

Summarised last 200 years its got hotter, last 200 years more CO2 and other GHG's due to human activity. I'll try and dig out a link which shows all the charts in one place.

 

[muzzysgal]

all sorts YV. My mate nearly ate one once, he thought he had found a sugered mouse.

A certain episode of The Young Ones instantly springs to mind :icon_lol:

 

[MKFox]

it's a telescope!

 

[muzzysgal]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0313RwYnAQ[/youtube]

 

[Dickovforengland!]

My wife, my kids - my family and my friends (?)

And then the things that directly affect their everyday life - money issues, education for my kids, the state of my/their local community. The things that really matter to everyone, rather than some pretentious enviro-friendly twaddle

Next on my (personal) list come fighting social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations. Those I see as extremely important issues, and I spend some time doing something about them when I get the chance, but I don't generally wet my pants about them

A long, long way down the list is a load of pissy unproven shite about the feckin' environment

It's just not important, and neither is what is on Sky Sports News - but thanks for your bleeding heart concern

The point I am trying to make is that the pissy unproven shite about the feckin' environment will have a greater effect on your kids lives (assuming they stay within the UK) than social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations.

 

[Macky]

The point I am trying to make is that the pissy unproven shite about the feckin' environment will have a greater effect on your kids lives (assuming they stay within the UK) than social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations.

You could only make such a bold statement if you didn't believe that it was pissy unproven shite.

But if you don't believe that it's pissy unproven shite there is absolutely **** all that you can do as an individual to make any difference whatever.
However, there's an awful lot that you can do as an individual to counter social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations.

 

[homer]

The point I am trying to make is that the pissy unproven shite about the feckin' environment will have a greater effect on your kids lives (assuming they stay within the UK) than social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations.

I don't believe that for one single minute - which is precisely why I concern myself with real things rather than the aforementioned pissy unproven shite about the feckin' environment :icon_roll

 

[Trifull]

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_topic2.pdf

Check out page 4, in the last 10000 years atmospheric CO2 fluctuates between about 260 and 280 parts per million. From 1800 to 2000 it went from 280 to over 375 if that isn't a step change in the rate of increase I don't know what is. Its still increasing we could go well over 500 ppm if we don't change our habits.

Add on to that some positive feedback loops like the North Polar ice disappearing reducing the amount of reflected sunlight and it doesn't look great. Also unchecked its possible the natural ecosystem will become a natural CO2 producer one of the reasons being the sea cannot absorb much more CO2.

Despite that, lets assume we do manage to see CO2 levels plumetting back towards 260. We can start burning stuff and filling the atmosphere with Sulphur Hexafluride which has about 23,900 x the Greenhouse effect of CO2. That should heat things up again.

It would be a very nice thing to worry about CO2 levels dropping.

It's actually sad that you've been taken in by the IPCC report. That report was done by approx 2500 scientists. When the US was asked to sign the Kyoto agreement 17000 scientists signed a petition to stop the US signing. 8000 of those scientists work in the areas of marine life, air quality etc etc, and also NASA. They point to the fact that climate change is a natural phenomenom, the ice age for starters, then the 800's ad when the ice melted and Greenland was first populated.
There are also many ways of solving the problem of CO2 emisions. In the 1970's a German company first invented a conversion kit for diesel engines so that they could run on recycled vegtable oil, yet this is not promoted by any government. This conversion kit is now easily obtainable.
In the last few days certain groups have now begun protesting about the use of vegtable oil to run vehicles, this was after a plane flew from the UK to europe using a substitute fuel. They are now complaining that using vegetable oil will increase food prices, yet they don't mention recycled vegetable oil. These people want it both ways and wont be happy until we're all back on push bikes.
Don't be taken in by the IPCC report, it was constructed by hand picked scientists, where as the petition against the US signing the Kyoto agreement was done by choice.

 

[Dickovforengland!]

But if you don't believe that it's pissy unproven shite there is absolutely **** all that you can do as an individual to make any difference whatever.
However, there's an awful lot that you can do as an individual to counter social injustice, poverty, discrimination, bigotry, the abuse (any kind) of individuals, exploitation and downright nastiness by individuals and/or corporations.

Countering social injustice in the UK and Climate Change both require the belief that an individual can have an effect on the opinions and actions of a larger social group. So if there's **** all you can do about Climate Change there's **** all you can do about anything in society so why bother tyring to change anything.

Clearly historical movements have sprung up and changed opinions, whats socially acceptable now is very different from the 70's.

As far as poverty goes you can get a job in Beaumont Leys moving crisps round a warehouse or factory that puts 2 grand in your pocket every month and you can rent a gaff in Leicester for £600 no problem. So although there are very poor people in the UK I don't see it as a massive problem.

However look at Anglian Waters 25 year strategy and their challenges. Predicted sea level rises, more flooding in East Anglia, less total rainfall, less land to build on more homes planned to be built round there. Massive infrastructure investment for all the treatment works based on the coast. That looks like either big price rises or large government subsidies. Either way someone pays.

Read AW's strategy document. Its real and it will happen in the life time of people posting on this site. Whether you rate climate change as an important political issue or not it will affect our lives, its not as someone put something just for our children's children's children to be concerned about.

The common misconception is it won't affect us for a long time. Clearly its not going to be the end of human life either.

If you read around the subject, as it appears Macky has, and you think its not a problem fair enough but if you have any interest in whats going on in the world its worth having an informed opinion on.

 

[Hector]

Even if the claims about climate change were exagerrated, or just plain wrong, (which sadly I very much doubt), surely the fact that there is uncertainty about it is sufficient to adopt a precautionary principle. It simply "makes sense" to adopt more sustainable policies. We don't have a back up planet we can move on to if we have miscalculated.

My problem with all those who don't believe there is a problem is that its a very short-termist (and therefore selfish) attitude. We have made vast changes to our planet in a tiny period of time (say a couple of hundred years), relative to the entire history of the human race, - and continue to do so. It may be that the severest consequences aren't felt as soon as the direr forecasts predict, but can we really see this level of human activity being sustainable over the next 1,000 years? or 10,000?

 

[Trifull]

Climate change does exist, no doubt. Can we actually do anything about it .. no, it's a naturally occuring event. We as the human race should stop thinking we are responsible and that we are able to combat it and should be looking at what it's actual effects will be on us and how we are going to live with those effects. A report, many years ago, stated that a new channel will cover from the Bristol channel across the country to Norfolk. Instead of trying to fight it, (flood barriers etc) we should be looking to build houses in more sensible areas. Who in the right mind builds houses on a flood plain, arrogantly thinking they can defeat the flow of water ?
Of course, as water levels raise and the world warms, other areas will become accessable for inhabitation (as Greenland did in the 800's).
There is also the argument that the world is expanding in size (through earth quakes and volcanic eruptions) and this will balance out the increase in water area.

 

[homer]

As far as poverty goes you can get a job in Beaumont Leys moving crisps round a warehouse or factory that puts 2 grand in your pocket every month and you can rent a gaff in Leicester for £600 no problem. So although there are very poor people in the UK I don't see it as a massive problem.

Ah, here we have a much learned individual, obviously - the root cause of poverty being the fecklessness of the poor etc. etc.

You spend all your time fannying about worrying about the ****ing global environment, yet there are people on your own doorstep who fighting the poverty trap every day - and they might just be unable to take that job in BL due to physical/social/mental barriers placed before them.

But you are blind to that, or you simply don't care. They are only scummy people - what value are their problems compared to the problem of CO2 gasses. The scrounging feckers should should get on their bike and sort themselves out. Someone should just give them a bloody good kick up the arse - didn't you know that the world will end in a squillion years if you don't switch off your telly at night ? What do you mean the Bailiffs have just taken your telly - well I'm minted so it doesn't really concern me. It's not a problem really, if you average it out over the whole population.

And, for the record, you can counter social injustice on an individual level, if you choose to. You don't have to change the whole ****ing world to make a difference to someone's life. But, again, that is irrelelvant to people like you, isn't it. What's the point of making things better for a few hundred people, if you can't sort out the whole of the problem for the whole country (or even the world). It's not worth the bother

Instead we should wring our hands and worry about some global issue that may or may actually be true - and even if it was the impact you can have as an individual is almost nil.

I prefer to spend my life thinking about and working at something which I know is real and that I know I can affect (regardless of of scale)

 

[Dickovforengland!]

Ah, here we have a much learned individual, obviously - the root cause of poverty being the fecklessness of the poor etc. etc.

You spend all your time fannying about worrying about the ****ing global environment, yet there are people on your own doorstep who fighting the poverty trap every day - and they might just be unable to take that job in BL due to physical/social/mental barriers placed before them.

But you are blind to that, or you simply don't care. They are only scummy people - what value are their problems compared to the problem of CO2 gasses. The scrounging feckers should should get on their bike and sort themselves out. Someone should just give them a bloody good kick up the arse - didn't you know that the world will end in a squillion years if you don't switch off your telly at night ? What do you mean the Bailiffs have just taken your telly - well I'm minted so it doesn't really concern me. It's not a problem really, if you average it out over the whole population.

And, for the record, you can counter social injustice on an individual level, if you choose to. You don't have to change the whole ****ing world to make a difference to someone's life. But, again, that is irrelelvant to people like you, isn't it. What's the point of making things better for a few hundred people, if you can't sort out the whole of the problem for the whole country (or even the world). It's not worth the bother

Instead we should wring our hands and worry about some global issue that may or may actually be true - and even if it was the impact you can have as an individual is almost nil.

I prefer to spend my life thinking about and working at something which I know is real and that I know I can affect (regardless of of scale)

I spend very little of my time fannying about worrying about the ****ing global environment. I make choices and actions where I can that minimise my effect on it. When I see what I perceive as an ill informed head in the sand opinion that climate change isn't happening, it isn't caused by human activity, it won't affect me (which is the impression I got from your posts) I try and challenge it and ask people to read around the subject. That's not mutually exclusive from helping out individuals.

Mental Health and Lung Cancer have killed members of my immediate family, both of which I spend time and effort helping individuals with. I think Climate Change is a bigger problem. I am not saying don't spend time helping people, just don't assume the people you are helping won't also be affected by Climate Change. It will affect everyone, especially if they are poor. So yes Homer I see Climate Change as bigger problem but that doesn't mean I go around kicking homeless people and laughing as go home to my nice cosy flat.

Like Triful says we need to adapt to it (but we as humans are causing it). We can't adapt to it if we don't recognise the timescales it operates on. I'd rather adpat to smaller effects than big ones.

 

[Dickovforengland!]

Climate change does exist, no doubt. Can we actually do anything about it .. no, it's a naturally occuring event.

There is nothing naturally occuring about the rate of increase in Greenhouse Gases in the atmosphere. That is something we can do something about.

 

[homer]

I spend very little of my time fannying about worrying about the ****ing global environment. I make choices and actions where I can that minimise my effect on it.

Good on yer, I'm very glad for you

Tell you what - I'll turn my TV off tonight instead of leaving it on standby.

The fact that China and India are building new coal-powered plants every day of the week is irrlelevant. I will have done my bit to save the world