FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Climate Change - That Disobedient Ice Cap

Page  <1234 6>
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote waynorth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 5:28pm
waynorth View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Location: Kerikeri
Status: Offline
Points: 1113
Originally posted by fish-feeder fish-feeder wrote:

Climate and weather go hand in hand,they both change. We may be adding to it,but we are not the sole contributing factor.

Quite right. We need to sit those other things down & give them a good talking to. Like the sun for example. And volcanoes.

Actually, I don't know what the fuss is really. Nothing in these charts that a few thousand years can't sort out.












She'll be right mate. If it gets serious I'm sure they'll let us know.
treat fish like fish
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote krow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 5:50pm
krow View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Location: Whangarei
Status: Offline
Points: 5560
Guess what too New Zealand's total greenhouse emissions equal 0.2% of global so let's all do our bit and change the world. Try and find that info on the net. Then try and say we aren't being scammed. As far as the science goes all figures can be manipulated. Please note all the figures you are given are cut off in the early 70's. Want to know why? Well just maybe and only maybe (if you can believe the facts) that was the end of a cold spell in the temperatures rhythms of the globe. If you really knew what was what and bothered to actually find out for yourself you'll see these scare mongers have been saying the Artic polar cap will melt completely for 30 years. They just keep changing the prediction date when it doesn't happen. Oh and BTW the warm and colder times are independent of Co2 in the atmosphere too. Problem with the People is once they believe something true you won't change their minds. Show them different and they'll argue till blue in the face rather than admit they may have been misled and believed a lie. On a lighter note: We didn't go to the moon and the world is pear shaped.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote pjc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 5:53pm
pjc View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 04 Apr 2010
Location: papakura
Status: Offline
Points: 9997
My Dad was born in the 1920s and he along with other elders claim it was warmer during the 1930s/40s than what is today.

Sure Man may of contributed to partial warming today but we cannot be blamed for it all,rising sea levels or are these atols sinking??

The carbon tax con that we have been signed up too is a privilege so we  may get cheaper goods from Asian country's who no intention of reducing their carbon  foot print.

So many unanswered questions,volcanoes peat/forest fires etc must all contribute some way.

100yrs of records proves nothing,Frances hottest days is another con as temps were taken out of the wind and in direct sunshine.



But they don’t mention that where it was recorded was next to a concrete drain, and a steel chain mesh fence close to a bitumen (asphalt) highway.

And if you feel guilty about climate change better sell your petrol/diesel motors and start paddling as electric is just or more polluting than using fossil fuel.

water water everywhere,how many fish does it hold?
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote MATTOO Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 6:07pm
MATTOO View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 10 Sep 2010
Location: The Dawn
Status: Offline
Points: 5074
What I don't get is those who buy in to either side of the arguement.
Prefer discussion but protagonists both sides like inflammation.

It actually doesn't matter which side is right.

Unless all countries buy in to either point of view nothing will change.

And that's a "Yeah Right" comment.

So your exacerbation about the subject is like, no emojis available to suit point.
Pissing into the wind.

The main real facts are extensive but are based on human involvement on this flat earth.

We are polluting, raping resources and justifying it in any way we can.
We are thwart humans.

Unless we are all on the same page we are never, never going to resolve the problems our planet has for the survival of humans in what we now or did call good times.

Give up on the fight, accept the fragility of humans good and bad.

Go fishing, love your children, have a mountain of sex with your partner, gorge yourself of the foods available, be excited about the beauties of nature, and go fishing.

Cos theres **** load of nothing you can do about the enevitable decline as we know it.

See you on the water. Or on the rocks.
Just cruising in my now sweetas pimped out Southern 755 HT0!
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Muppet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 6:50pm
Muppet View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2004
Location: North Shore
Status: Offline
Points: 14609
We are on the same page though aren't we. We all want to enjoy our lives best we can and much of it by produces some sort of pollutant.

Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote waynorth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 8:15pm
waynorth View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Location: Kerikeri
Status: Offline
Points: 1113
@Krow Yes, of course our total emissions at 0.17% of the world total is tiny, especially compared to the 2 big ones - China at 27% and the USA at 15%. That changes pretty dramatically when you look at per capita though. At 16 tonnes per person we are double China & the UK, and not far behind the USA at 19 tonnes. Interestingly Australia comes in at 8th in the world at 25 tonnes. We might not make much headway convincing China to stop burning coal, or the USA, or even Oz, but our own backyard could do with a cleanup too.   

And you are right about people being unwilling to change their minds. Sometimes its because they operate in an echo chamber, and sometimes because they have a vested interest in denying inconvenient facts. Being skeptical about both the facts and the experts who provide them works for me.

@PJC Its not just the atolls its every sea level gauge on the planet, and the satellites too - all saying the same thing. The low lying atolls are just paying the price first. 

Re the record temperature in France - did your research pick up on the fact that:

"Watts Up With That? (or WUWT) is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006. The blog predominantly discusses climate issues with a focus on anthropogenic climate change, generally accommodating beliefs that are in opposition to the scientific consensus on climate change."

Another echo chamber.

@Mattoo  We're never going to solve the planet's problems ? Just give up the fight ? Sounds like a pretty sad self-fulfilling prophecy.  


treat fish like fish
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (7) Likes(7)   Quote Alan L Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 8:21pm
Alan L View Drop Down
Gold
Gold


Joined: 21 Nov 2012
Location: Hastings
Status: Offline
Points: 857
OK, I wasn't going to post here- it is a fishing website, right?
I have a PhD in science. Brmbrm would call me a climate denier. Greepeace are very good at politicising stffand making labels. I would call myself agnostic. unlike most here (incl Brmbrm) I have spent ages looking for the quintessential science paper linking CO2 to global warming. It has to exist right? Like all great discoveries - Einsteins theory of relativity, Darwins theory of evolution, Watson and Cricks discovery of the duble helix (DNA). (my computer is doing weird **** - sorry - can't fix right now - bear with me)
This seminal paper should be at the top of all GW papers as the prime citation. It is not. I have spent hundreds of hrs looking for it. Instead I get IPCC quotes. I have read most of the early IPCC reports (unlike Brmbrm I guess) looking for the citation. Guess what... it is not there. Just hypotheses. That is a loooong way from fact.
Show of hands (votes for the hypothesis ) doesnot cut it scientifically. One ugly fact can change a beautiful theory no matter how many subscribe to it. The science iscorrupt. Sorry. You talk about big oil companies etc.. Greepeace rhetoric again. Scientist are corrupt too. They have mortgages to pay, research projects they want to fund.Their move thru the ranks usually depends on the number of papers printed etc. It all takes funding esp in science - expensive equipment, fieldtrips, students to fund etc. Where else to get the funding but the billion $ GW industry. NZ incl. Unlike Brmbrm, I have sat on all sides of this equation - provider of funds, applicant for funds and referee of Govt science funds. It is a game. Make no mistake, and they know how to play it. If you want to studythe sex life of an obscure ant , what funding pool do you have a chance in. Now tag 'with respect to climate change' and your funding pool just grew mega $s. Is this scientist likely to challenge the notion of AGW? Like thousands of others chasing the GW money trail - Billions of $s. Don't point the finger at oil companies.
Unlike Brmbrm, I have been involved in some climate researchfor NZ's past climate.
Brmbrm - find me the papers and I can subscribe to your view. I have spent ages looking for them - no luck so far.
So then we move to 'green' alternatives. brmbrm, do you know how many mega tonnes of planet earth are crushed/mined for rare earths to make the batteries, or how much CO2 is expended? And what to do with the batteries? And how to charge them - sustainably. Dam every river?
For me Hydrogen would be the answer. I doubt I will ever buy an EV - my conscience won't let me, but politics prevail. We all want to be seen to be green, even if it kills us. The energy equation for hydrogen has been the problem. Solar may fix that - if you are comfortable with a tank of hydrogen in your car. But we got to the moon 50 yrs ago, so should be able to solve the pesky issues that go with it.
is the science as setted as you would like to think Brmbrm?. No where near. The IPCC even rates the solar energy factor as 'largely unknown' or - 'poorly understood' I think is theirterm. the largest energy input into planet earth. The largest GHG- water vapour - BY A LOONG WAY. 70-80%. small changes in H2O have a LARGE effect on retained IR heat. The sun emits UV (short wavelength) which is radiated back (at night) as longer wavelength IR. H2O is a much stronger absorber of IR than the fractional % CO2. That is why deserts get so cold at night.
So, Brmbrm, find me the papers - that should be at the top of every GW funded research paper, and I will subscribe to your view. Until then, the jury is out on my part.
regards
Alan
Legasea Legend member
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Muppet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 8:32pm
Muppet View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2004
Location: North Shore
Status: Offline
Points: 14609
Another scientist said pretty much what you just posted Alan L on the Leighton Smith show on ZB regarding H20 in the atmosphere. But because he is "right wing" he gets shutdown by a lot of people who have a vested interest in creating "crisis". 

Just reading the Guardian apparently 97% of all large freshwater species have gone disappeared since 1970. 97% is a very highly used number among the scientific community! 
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote reel crayze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Aug 2019 at 9:02pm
reel crayze View Drop Down
Silver
Silver


Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Location: Canterbury
Status: Offline
Points: 343
Originally posted by Alan L Alan L wrote:

OK, I wasn't going to post here- it is a fishing website, right?
I have a PhD in science. Brmbrm would call me a climate denier. Greepeace are very good at politicising stffand making labels. I would call myself agnostic. unlike most here (incl Brmbrm) I have spent ages looking for the quintessential science paper linking CO2 to global warming. It has to exist right? Like all great discoveries - Einsteins theory of relativity, Darwins theory of evolution, Watson and Cricks discovery of the duble helix (DNA). (my computer is doing weird **** - sorry - can't fix right now - bear with me)
This seminal paper should be at the top of all GW papers as the prime citation. It is not. I have spent hundreds of hrs looking for it. Instead I get IPCC quotes. I have read most of the early IPCC reports (unlike Brmbrm I guess) looking for the citation. Guess what... it is not there. Just hypotheses. That is a loooong way from fact.
Show of hands (votes for the hypothesis ) doesnot cut it scientifically. One ugly fact can change a beautiful theory no matter how many subscribe to it. The science iscorrupt. Sorry. You talk about big oil companies etc.. Greepeace rhetoric again. Scientist are corrupt too. They have mortgages to pay, research projects they want to fund.Their move thru the ranks usually depends on the number of papers printed etc. It all takes funding esp in science - expensive equipment, fieldtrips, students to fund etc. Where else to get the funding but the billion $ GW industry. NZ incl. Unlike Brmbrm, I have sat on all sides of this equation - provider of funds, applicant for funds and referee of Govt science funds. It is a game. Make no mistake, and they know how to play it. If you want to studythe sex life of an obscure ant , what funding pool do you have a chance in. Now tag 'with respect to climate change' and your funding pool just grew mega $s. Is this scientist likely to challenge the notion of AGW? Like thousands of others chasing the GW money trail - Billions of $s. Don't point the finger at oil companies.
Unlike Brmbrm, I have been involved in some climate researchfor NZ's past climate.
Brmbrm - find me the papers and I can subscribe to your view. I have spent ages looking for them - no luck so far.
So then we move to 'green' alternatives. brmbrm, do you know how many mega tonnes of planet earth are crushed/mined for rare earths to make the batteries, or how much CO2 is expended? And what to do with the batteries? And how to charge them - sustainably. Dam every river?
For me Hydrogen would be the answer. I doubt I will ever buy an EV - my conscience won't let me, but politics prevail. We all want to be seen to be green, even if it kills us. The energy equation for hydrogen has been the problem. Solar may fix that - if you are comfortable with a tank of hydrogen in your car. But we got to the moon 50 yrs ago, so should be able to solve the pesky issues that go with it.
is the science as setted as you would like to think Brmbrm?. No where near. The IPCC even rates the solar energy factor as 'largely unknown' or - 'poorly understood' I think is theirterm. the largest energy input into planet earth. The largest GHG- water vapour - BY A LOONG WAY. 70-80%. small changes in H2O have a LARGE effect on retained IR heat. The sun emits UV (short wavelength) which is radiated back (at night) as longer wavelength IR. H2O is a much stronger absorber of IR than the fractional % CO2. That is why deserts get so cold at night.
So, Brmbrm, find me the papers - that should be at the top of every GW funded research paper, and I will subscribe to your view. Until then, the jury is out on my part.
regards
Alan
 
Possibly this may have an answer for you ?

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

 
 
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
 
 
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote v8-coupe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 8:52am
v8-coupe View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jul 2002
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 2617
Originally posted by Alan L Alan L wrote:

OK, I wasn't going to post here- it is a fishing website, right?
I have a PhD in science. Brmbrm would call me a climate denier. Greepeace are very good at politicising stffand making labels. I would call myself agnostic. unlike most here (incl Brmbrm) I have spent ages looking for the quintessential science paper linking CO2 to global warming. It has to exist right? Like all great discoveries - Einsteins theory of relativity, Darwins theory of evolution, Watson and Cricks discovery of the duble helix (DNA). (my computer is doing weird **** - sorry - can't fix right now - bear with me)
This seminal paper should be at the top of all GW papers as the prime citation. It is not. I have spent hundreds of hrs looking for it. Instead I get IPCC quotes. I have read most of the early IPCC reports (unlike Brmbrm I guess) looking for the citation. Guess what... it is not there. Just hypotheses. That is a loooong way from fact.
Show of hands (votes for the hypothesis ) doesnot cut it scientifically. One ugly fact can change a beautiful theory no matter how many subscribe to it. The science iscorrupt. Sorry. You talk about big oil companies etc.. Greepeace rhetoric again. Scientist are corrupt too. They have mortgages to pay, research projects they want to fund.Their move thru the ranks usually depends on the number of papers printed etc. It all takes funding esp in science - expensive equipment, fieldtrips, students to fund etc. Where else to get the funding but the billion $ GW industry. NZ incl. Unlike Brmbrm, I have sat on all sides of this equation - provider of funds, applicant for funds and referee of Govt science funds. It is a game. Make no mistake, and they know how to play it. If you want to studythe sex life of an obscure ant , what funding pool do you have a chance in. Now tag 'with respect to climate change' and your funding pool just grew mega $s. Is this scientist likely to challenge the notion of AGW? Like thousands of others chasing the GW money trail - Billions of $s. Don't point the finger at oil companies.
Unlike Brmbrm, I have been involved in some climate researchfor NZ's past climate.
Brmbrm - find me the papers and I can subscribe to your view. I have spent ages looking for them - no luck so far.
So then we move to 'green' alternatives. brmbrm, do you know how many mega tonnes of planet earth are crushed/mined for rare earths to make the batteries, or how much CO2 is expended? And what to do with the batteries? And how to charge them - sustainably. Dam every river?
For me Hydrogen would be the answer. I doubt I will ever buy an EV - my conscience won't let me, but politics prevail. We all want to be seen to be green, even if it kills us. The energy equation for hydrogen has been the problem. Solar may fix that - if you are comfortable with a tank of hydrogen in your car. But we got to the moon 50 yrs ago, so should be able to solve the pesky issues that go with it.
is the science as setted as you would like to think Brmbrm?. No where near. The IPCC even rates the solar energy factor as 'largely unknown' or - 'poorly understood' I think is theirterm. the largest energy input into planet earth. The largest GHG- water vapour - BY A LOONG WAY. 70-80%. small changes in H2O have a LARGE effect on retained IR heat. The sun emits UV (short wavelength) which is radiated back (at night) as longer wavelength IR. H2O is a much stronger absorber of IR than the fractional % CO2. That is why deserts get so cold at night.
So, Brmbrm, find me the papers - that should be at the top of every GW funded research paper, and I will subscribe to your view. Until then, the jury is out on my part.
regards
Alan


Hi Alan.
Agree with your words on EV's.
They are a touchy feely new age must have.
Batteries with man-made poisonous chemicals need to be made "AND" recycled.
Not energy efficient or environmentally friendly at all.
I also agree hydrogen is the way to go and I believe Hyundai and a few others are heading down that path.
Hydrogen/electric so only one battery required with I believe the only by-product being water.
Have been watching the history channel about lost villages and towns around the British/European coast line.
Many were lost to huge unexpected storms and some were just swamped by sea level rise.
All this before the Remuera tractor or coal driven industrial revolution ever tool place.
This will not be palatable, however, the only way to solve the Earths problem is a rapid and violent depopulation of the human race.
Nothing to do with global warming, that will happen anyway, as it is a natural part of the earths history.
I am talking species and resources.
The latest adds are telling us all to go vegetarian so we can halt the so called greenhouse gases of the beef industry.
Forests will still have to be cleared to sustain an entire world of vegetarians.
Nothing at all is mentioned about stopping human population growth.
Capitalism will not let human growth stop as it needs this growth to grow itself.
Before modern medicine/technology, the population was small and when the inevitable and natural climate change occurred, people could just pack up and move to another safer more suitable area.
We can no longer do this, hence we have people living in areas the ancients would not because they knew it was prone to natural disasters.
We see the results of this with ever increasing articles about the number of lives lost in these ancient no go no live areas.
Bottom line.
You get nothing for nothing and there is always a cost to be paid by someone or something somewhere.

Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Transformations Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 9:32am
Transformations View Drop Down
Silver
Silver
Avatar

Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Location: Hender,Auckland
Status: Offline
Points: 496
Halleluja, was beginning to think there was no sanity out there. Thanks Muppet, V8, Alan and some others.

Those that believe "the science is settled" should really go to SpecSaversūü§ź
We don't know what we don't need till we've got it
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote reel crayze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 10:43am
reel crayze View Drop Down
Silver
Silver


Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Location: Canterbury
Status: Offline
Points: 343
Originally posted by Transformations Transformations wrote:

Halleluja, was beginning to think there was no sanity out there. Thanks Muppet, V8, Alan and some others.

Those that believe "the science is settled" should really go to SpecSaversūü§ź
 
So let me get this correct .
 
We have NASA which is chock full of the some of the worlds leading climate scientists telling us we have a problem and then we have the big oil, energy companies and all the influence we know they have with politicians and they have the attitude " nothing to see here " [pun intended].. 
 
Tell me about Specsavers ???
 
Its the old adage.. follow the money.. the NASA scientists have nothing to gain yet they still keep telling us there is a problem, what is there motive ?.. Oil industry, i wonder what drives them ?? [excuse the pun] 
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote MightyBoosh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 11:20am
MightyBoosh View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 08 Jan 2016
Location: Northland
Status: Offline
Points: 1913
My prediction is that climate change, man-made or otherwise is going to kill off millions of primarily poor people in low-lying, developing countries. That is happening right now for a variety of reasons. Do we care? Yes, a bit, but not enough to actually do anything meaningful about it. Developed nations have the resources to adapt. Coastal land will be lost and there will be changes to our way life. Life will get harder and more expensive, and we won't be able to go on holiday to the pacific islands because they won't exist, but in general, we will just keep ticking along for a very long time. 


World's most boring jetski "pilot".
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Kevin.S Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 1:31pm
Kevin.S View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Location: Waiuku
Status: Offline
Points: 5681
The big problem I have with most of the climate change "experts" is that they keep making predictions of impending disaster that always turn out to be wrong.  Not that long ago they were talking about covering the polar ice caps with black plastic to try and retain more of the suns heat to stave off the impending ice age that was coming.  Then it was global warming and by now we were all supposed to have been roasted, now it's climate change and it's all about wild weather events.  No wonder so many of us have become jaded and no longer listen to them.  Unfortunately it's like the boy who cried wolf, and if they ever do get it right hardly anyone will listen to them.

As for "what do the scientists have to gain", that's pretty obvious -millions of dollars in research funding, a cushy job and an income for life.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Muppet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 2:03pm
Muppet View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2004
Location: North Shore
Status: Offline
Points: 14609
Originally posted by reel crayze reel crayze wrote:

Originally posted by Transformations Transformations wrote:

Halleluja, was beginning to think there was no sanity out there. Thanks Muppet, V8, Alan and some others.

Those that believe "the science is settled" should really go to SpecSaversūü§ź

 
So let me get this correct .
 
We have NASA which is chock full of the some of the worlds leading climate scientists telling us we have a problem and then we have the big oil, energy companies and all the influence we know they have with politicians and they have the attitude " nothing to see here " [pun intended].. 
 
Tell me about Specsavers ???
 
Its the old adage.. follow the money.. the NASA scientists have nothing to gain yet they still keep telling us there is a problem, what is there motive ?.. Oil industry, i wonder what drives them ?? [excuse the pun] 


So if you are that passionate about the whole thing what you going to do?

I have this question many times to my mates even and they all still travel and consume more products than I do,

So really it is all just ironically hot air.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote MightyBoosh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 2:10pm
MightyBoosh View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 08 Jan 2016
Location: Northland
Status: Offline
Points: 1913
Yep, it's like the middle class kids who FLY to South America or Africa to take part in conservation projects LOL


World's most boring jetski "pilot".
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Catchelot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 2:50pm
Catchelot View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Location: Whanga-Vegas
Status: Offline
Points: 31003
"The sea, once it casts its spell, holds one in its net of wonder forever." - Jacques Cousteau
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Catchelot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 3:18pm
Catchelot View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 07 Oct 2008
Location: Whanga-Vegas
Status: Offline
Points: 31003
"The sea, once it casts its spell, holds one in its net of wonder forever." - Jacques Cousteau
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote reel crayze Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 3:41pm
reel crayze View Drop Down
Silver
Silver


Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Location: Canterbury
Status: Offline
Points: 343
Originally posted by Kevin.S Kevin.S wrote:

The big problem I have with most of the climate change "experts" is that they keep making predictions of impending disaster that always turn out to be wrong.  Not that long ago they were talking about covering the polar ice caps with black plastic to try and retain more of the suns heat to stave off the impending ice age that was coming.  Then it was global warming and by now we were all supposed to have been roasted, now it's climate change and it's all about wild weather events.  No wonder so many of us have become jaded and no longer listen to them.  Unfortunately it's like the boy who cried wolf, and if they ever do get it right hardly anyone will listen to them.

As for "what do the scientists have to gain", that's pretty obvious -millions of dollars in research funding, a cushy job and an income for life.
 
It is a problem i agree that continual beat ups that "the world is going to melt" does the science no favours. Media beat up maybe ?
 
As for millions of dollars in research funding to be made and cushy jobs for life.. Nah a scientist is only as good as their last results. If NASA were getting it wrong so often i am sure Trump [and oil] would of stopped all the weather funding.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Nick22009 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2019 at 4:20pm
Nick22009 View Drop Down
Bronze
Bronze


Joined: 18 Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Bring back the giant parrot I say Cool - subtropical South Island, now that would have been a treat!  

Guess they weren't able to sheet enough to keep the environment warm enough so they eventually died Cry
Back to Top
Page  <1234 6>
Forum Jump
Forum Permissions View Drop Down


This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.