Climate Change

Please treat other members in a friendly and respectful manner: Our Community Guidelines.

  • I am starting to worry in earnest about the way the so-called green movement is going. And I am a green oriented human. However, the current crop of loons are beginning to make fascism look tame. The utilisation of the young Swedish girl is, to my mind, a step too far. It's time to put this whole thing into perspective and instead of banging on about it myself, I came across this video. And I agree with him 100%. He calls them "watermelons" and they are a dangerous, often nasty lunatic fringe that is becoming mainstream and could cause a lot of misery and oppression if they are allowed to carry out their mostly unworkable plans concerning what we eat, how we think and what we do.


    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • They never mention the elephant in the room: Too many people for the planet to support even if everybody stopped using fossil fuel and ate quinoa and beansprouts instead of meat and fish.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • Absolutely, Heero. It's the underlying cause of conflict, famine and migration in our time.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • No insult to the girl, but as soon as she popped up on my screen, I turned over. Clearly being used for other's interests.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • And when they start offering you Nobel prizes you know you have been selected as a pawn. No wonder Bob Dylan didn't want his. I think he could smell a rat, but didn't want to say so in so many words.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • Climate change may well drastically reduce the number of people on the planet directly. That's the Gaia Earth spirit acting to restore the natural balance.:)

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • When big industrial nations such as China, USA, and India stop spewing vast amounts of poison into the atmosphere then our individual efforts might have some effect

    But until then why should we bother

    A Hand Up Not A Hand Out

  • On the subject of that kid and the school strikes, any kid who decides to copy her in the UK their parents would end up getting

    fined for them not being in school.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • We live in clown world and the clowns stop smiling when you start questioning the sanity of their circus.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • that kid and the school strikes

    These same kids that expect to be driven everywhere in their parents gas guzzlers, be toasty warm in the winter and go flying away to foreign holidays. They don't seem to realise that they are part of the problem that they protest about.:rolleyes:

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • There was a great news article in the last Sunday Times

    They never mention the elephant in the room: Too many people for the planet to support even if everybody stopped using fossil fuel and ate quinoa and beansprouts instead of meat and fish.

    Yet the present plan for 2030 or 2050 or 3050 is going to end up a Soylent Green lifestyle. If you'll forgive the pun, nuts to that.


    The idea that we can get all fired up on this great mission because we've found the right leader, a cute slightly Asperger-ish 15 year old girl would be terrifying if it wasn't so tragically funny. Her unwavering proposition is unquestionably 100% correct: we ought to do something as soon as we can. She hasn't said what but then, she's a big thinker and we shouldn't bother her with trivial details - especially as no one has the faintest fu--ing idea what to do other than slow down the unquantifiable causes of climate change, where no one dares to mention that fastest and most effective way to reduce the aggregate footprint is to have fewer feet. After all, inasmuch as the causes are man-made, stemming from the provision of food, water, mobility and enough of a reason for wanting to live, it surely follows that the only truly long-term chance of continuing in the manner to which we have become accustomed is to quite soon (a) halt population growth on earth and/or (b) find a way to amortise our ecologically destructive immediate-gratification lifestyle across other inhabitable planets (ideally sending out all the Chinese as he first wave!) and, while we're doing (a) and (b), we ought to tread a little lighter on this planet.


    For me, the funniest and yet most definitive comment I have heard on climate change is this:


  • When big industrial nations such as China, USA, and India stop spewing vast amounts of poison into the atmosphere then our individual efforts might have some effect

    But until then why should we bother

    I take the point, but as a developed nation, we must do our bit, even if those billions aren't doing there's yet.


    For me, the funniest and yet most definitive comment I have heard on climate change is this

    I know you've mentioned Peterson before and was quite taken aback when I said I've never heard of him, but after watching that, I can see why you like him.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • 1 I take the point, but as a developed nation, we must do our bit, even if those billions aren't doing there's yet.


    2 I know you've mentioned Peterson before and was quite taken aback when I said I've never heard of him, but after watching that, I can see why you like him.

    1 I agree, when it comes to not being wasteful just because one can afford to be, it is immoral as well harmful to one's fellow man not to try at least bit harder


    2 I think/hope that means you like him too. You have to admit - on climate change as well as much else - he takes no prisoners

  • 2 I think/hope that means you like him too. You have to admit - on climate change as well as much else - he takes no prisoners

    It's the first thing I've ever seen him say, so I would need to check some of his other comments out, before coming to a opinion on them. He appears level headed.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I know I go on about it a lot, but the majority of problems we have are all for the same reason. We are pathetically attempting to cure the symptoms, rather than address the root cause. Reduce the world population by half, and you will reduce the world emissions by half. Too many people means to much waist, too much required food, and the space required to develop it. The energy required, the transportation, the consumables etc etc. Just about everything human beings need to survive and develop creates a carbon footprint. If we don't address the population it's going to be one step forward and two back. Of course, world leaders won't even talk about this because in order to grow a countries economy they need more people. It's also very difficult because of the aging population. To be honest I just don't know how we would have to go about it, I just know 7 billion people (and rising) is far to many.

    Don't make me angry

  • 1 re: relieving symptoms rather than curing root cause:


    Glad someone agrees with what I've already said on this forum!


    2 re: reduce the world population and reduce the world emissions:

    Glad someone agrees with what I've already said on this forum!


    3 re: world leaders won't talk about this because to grow their economy they need more people:

    That's the Asian or Totalitarian or Chinese. It isn't Singapore's or Japan's or South Korea's or Switzerland's. The main reason population reduction is not on the agenda is that everyone knows it means reducing the population of those who are, to the rest of this planet, an expensive useless dangerous burden, and there are no votes to be gained by offending the mass of virtue-signalling soft-headed idealistic liberals

  • I guess we should count ourselves lucky to have the so called experts who keep informing us what is exactly wrong with the world, where would we be without them.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • There has just been a big libel court case in America where the biggest climate change scaremonger has had his backside smacked for refusing to share data and calculation. The natural assumption being made is that his data and calculations won't stand up to scrutiny.


    Read the article here:


    Michael Mann, creator of the infamous global warming ‘hockey stick,’ loses lawsuit against climate skeptic

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • To ignore climate change and the damage our specie is doing to the environment is ignorant. Yes, our climate is cyclical, but the emissions and other forced imbalances we have made damages the planet we live. Of course, the planet will be around a lot longer than us, and the thousands of other specie we will destroy along the way will be replaced by something else. However, to pretend everything we do makes no difference to the world we live is short sited to say the very least.

    Don't make me angry

  • Agree BIbbles.


    Climate changes are a natural phenomenon, but the problem is that man is accelerating these changes which prevents all species (including us) to naturally evolve to meet the challenges of climate change.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I bet if it came to it most people have no interest in changing their life style in the belief that their little world does not contribute to any climate change, or they do not want to change that style because it would affect that style. Perhaps a bit of token stuff like swapping plastic straws for paper ones etc

    A Hand Up Not A Hand Out

  • Overpopulation is the biggest threat. Climate change activists studiously ignore this and so I see them as biased and politically motivated.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • Overpopulation is the biggest threat. Climate change activists studiously ignore this and so I see them as biased and politically motivated.

    Thank you. I'm so fed up with the studied silence that blocks this screamingly obvious solution. And have you noticed it's not just the activists who studiously ignore over-population but also the media when interviewing the activists?


    And we all know why, don't we?! Because eugenics always rears its ugly dr mengele head. It didn't help that Indira and Sanyay Ghandi gave population control a bad rap a few decades ago. And it served them right. Their solution was crude, insensitive and completely slanted ot women because, of course, men would not play ball (forgive the pun).


    Yet there are enlightened, fair, humane ways versus cruel, unfair, inhumane ways. Maybe the difference is embedded in the meaning and policy of "birth control" versus "population control", where the former requires more gentle persuasion and incentivisation towards individual human beings. That said, I admit that an army of government officials roaming around over-populated African shanty towns with a pair of vasectomy clippers does somewhat stretch the concept of "gentle persuasion". But what is so helpful and humane about an army of aid workers throwing food parcels, water-well bores, fertiliser and agricultural training at billions of people who are unable or unwilling to achieve a sustainable existence on this planet and instead have nothing better to do than procreate, or kill one another or march or float to some land of comparative milk & honey, whether in South Africa or Northern Europe, with the result that employment will be guaranteed for aid workers, UN peace force "observers" and border and coastal controllers?. It would seem that humans are much kinder and more realistic to horses with broken legs.


    One of the few advantages of dictatorship is that such a government doesn't have to win the support of an overriding majority of pig-ignorant citizens. China is an example of that, where it has used various methods of enforcing population or birth control with positive results. The downside is of course that such citizens feel and are subjugated. But much of life is a trade-off. Citizens get subjugated when their attitude and behaviour becomes a threat to the rest of society which is just trying to get along. The world would become impossible if we all wanted to become Che Guevara. The young protesters in Hong Kong will eventually have to resign themselves to that reality but sadly may not live long enough to witness China becoming a more active participant in a less-oppressive world order. It would help speed up political-cultural togetherness if Western values and democracy could demonstrate being a so much more superior system of governing. At present I can understand China's disdain.


    Returning to population control, the great irony is that it's dead easy (forgive the pun) to make a reliable forecast of the improved effectiveness of climate control (ie reduction in global warming) that will result from reducing over-population. By contrast, the forecasts of the present trend are ridiculously unreliable, not just because of the aggregation of errors as the forecast stretches ahead in years but also because of the increased corruption of politics into academic science, which was already in evidence long before climate change became the buzz topic. You only have to read the outcome of the legal battle between Dr Tim Bell and Dr Michael Mann to appreciate what happens to integrity when scientists in academia get together and board a gravy train. Dr Tim Ball called foul against Dr Michael Mann's famous "hockey stick" prediction of global warming (the typical "falling off a cliff" syndrome beloved of EU Remainers) and he demonstrated how Dr Michael Mann had manipulated / faked the data and remained unwilling (ie unable) to provide the raw data that could contest Dr Ball's accusation.*


    * Note to reader: last sentence revised thanks to Fidget noticing that I had at the end mistakenly reversed the names of the two contestants

  • I gave up with the so-called greens long ago. In their present incarnation they amount to a mental illness.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • You only have to read the outcome of the legal battle between Dr Tim Bell and Dr Michael Mann to appreciate what happens to integrity when scientists in academia get together and board a gravy train. Dr Tim Ball called foul against Dr Michael Mann's famous "hockey stick" prediction of global warming (the typical "falling off a cliff" syndrome beloved of EU Remainers) and he proved that Dr Michael Mann had manipulated / faked the data, not least because Dr Tim Ball was unwilling (ie unable) to provide the raw data that could defend that accusation.

    Have you got that the right way round? I read that it was Mann lost the court case because he refused to supply his data and workings (not Tim Ball), even though ordered to by the courts.


    See here:

    UPDATE – Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann “hides the decline” AGAIN

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Overpopulation is the biggest threat. Climate change activists studiously ignore this and so I see them as biased and politically motivated.

    How do you control the population?

    China tried it with limiting parents to just one child, and that caused outrage in the West as inhuman. Many attempts have been made to introduce contraception in Africa without success, in India and Bangladesh children are produced and valued as workers and income to the family

    A Hand Up Not A Hand Out

  • It's a huge problem. Where I am I have noticed that those who become educated have only two children. The others just breed like rabbits and this is a problem worldwide. But there is another problem and that is caused by certain religions and cultural beliefs. This causes manic breeding even among the wealthy and well educated.


    How to stop it is one of the big issues facing humanity in terms of what all this population heavy damage will do to the environment and resources and what it will do to already stable populations who have foolishly allowed uncontrolled immigration of fast breeding cultures.

    You only live twice, or so it seems

    One life for yourself, and one for your dreams


  • Have you got that the right way round? I read that it was Mann lost the court case because he refused to supply his data and workings (not Tim Ball), even though ordered to by the courts.


    See here:

    UPDATE – Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann “hides the decline” AGAIN

    Sorry - well spotted. I lulled myself into the rhythm of alternating between this punch & judy I should have ended with "........and he demonstrated how Dr Michael Mann had manipulated / faked the data and remained unwilling (ie unable) to provide the raw data that could contest Dr Ball's accusation".

  • How do you control the population?

    China tried it with limiting parents to just one child, and that caused outrage in the West as inhuman. Many attempts have been made to introduce contraception in Africa without success, in India and Bangladesh children are produced and valued as workers and income to the family

    We could start by only issuing child benefits to the first two children. Obviously, those already in receipt, or pregnant, would be exempt from the new rule, but it would be a start and maybe other countries would follow suit.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.