BBC Raises More ?s About Man Causing Climate Change

#1
I thought the science was conclusive that evil man (especially in the even more evil developed "West") was the reason for climate change such that we MUST act now to save the planet? I mean anyone who dared question this "truth" has been marginalized and excoriated.

Al Gore where are you? Yet more Inconvenient Truth?


Linky
 
#2
Corbyn has made millions from accurate long range weather forecasting for insurance companies.

The Met Office can't forecast more than two weeks ahead.

BBQ summer my ARRSE!
 
R

rogermellie

Guest
#3
Global warming/ climate change is all bollox in my opinion.
Just an excuse for goverments around the world to charge lots of "green tax".
Yes the climate has changed but its not all down to man.

Regards


RM
 

Attachments

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#4
Why is mankind so arrogant that we think that we are able to disrupt (to a significant degree) the natural course of the planet? Mother Nature will win. She always does in the end.
 
#5
jumpinjarhead said:
I thought the science was conclusive that evil man (especially in the even more evil developed "West") was the reason for climate change such that we MUST act now to save the planet? I mean anyone who dared question this "truth" has been marginalized and excoriated.

Al Gore where are you? Yet more Inconvenient Truth?


Linky
For someone who is happy to believe in an invisible sky fairy, you seem to really have something against science....

But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month. If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

If proved correct, all he has to do is submit his manuscript to either Science or Nature. If proved correct, the manuscript would be fast tracked for publication, his company would have more publicity than he could shake a stick at and he'd be rich...

So, why hasn't he submitted it?

1. those evil climate-scientists would use the peer-review process to bury it?
2. his story doesn't actually stand up to scrutiny?

I'm guessing 2, as if he really had cracked the issue, he'd be the most famous man on the planet...

If I recollect, you say you are in an academic post - if so, you'll recall this saying: "Publish or be damned..."
 
#6
rogermellie said:
Global warming/ climate change is all bollox in my opinion.
Just an excuse for goverments around the world to charge lots of "green tax".
Yes the climate has changed but its not all down to man.

Regards


RM
different data collected from a similar period shows a different story.

 
#9
Legs said:
Why is mankind so arrogant that we think that we are able to disrupt (to a significant degree) the natural course of the planet? Mother Nature will win. She always does in the end.
Indeed. IMO it's a load of old sh!te and simply an excuse for revenue raising with green taxes etc. The climates been changing since the beginning of time, that's why we had fcuking fire, and fcuking ice, and fcuking dinosaurs long before we had Range Rovers!
 
#10
But if as Prof Latif says there is going to be acooling trend then it is not warming, it's cooling?

Wheras the Metreological Centre say there will be warming.

Two centres of excellence, two different guesses, who's right?
 
#11
I would like to publish my theory on the Arse site.

Having studied the weather for 46 years my conclusion, which is revolutionary and ground breaking, is:

" As long as the planet exists in its current form....... then there will be weather!"

Sure some days will be better then others but weather will continue.

Please feel free to de-bunk this theory.
 
#12
jumpinjarhead said:
I thought the science was conclusive that evil man (especially in the even more evil developed "West") was the reason for climate change such that we MUST act now to save the planet? I mean anyone who dared question this "truth" has been marginalized and excoriated.

Al Gore where are you? Yet more Inconvenient Truth?


Linky
Come on JJH; you secretly voted for Al, didn't you? Go on, admit it! :D
 
#13
Global Warming is the new religion of the Left.

THeir last religion. Communism, was busted so they found a new one.


FACT: THe Earth was much colder during the ice ages, it them warmed up dramatically, what caused this warming? Neanderthal and Cro Magnon man started running around in 4x4? Or was it that huge ball of incandescent gas in the sky we call The Sun got hotter?
 

ancienturion

LE
Book Reviewer
#14
Oil_Slick said:
Global Warming is the new religion of the Left.

THeir last religion. Communism, was busted so they found a new one.
COmmunism is alive and well. It is now known as New Labour. But NL is not doing too well so the chattering masses have moved on to something else - Global Warming.
All these very clever people are forgetting that nature will do it's own thing. The only real damage we have done so far is to chop down most of the rain forests.
 
#15
Legs said:
Why is mankind so arrogant that we think that we are able to disrupt (to a significant degree) the natural course of the planet? Mother Nature will win. She always does in the end.
Remember these three letters: CFC?
Clue - they don't stand for Chelski Football Club.

They had a particularly marked effect on 'the natural course of the planet'...
Or was that all sunspot activity?
 
#16
Schleswig-Holstein said:
Legs said:
Why is mankind so arrogant that we think that we are able to disrupt (to a significant degree) the natural course of the planet? Mother Nature will win. She always does in the end.
Remember these three letters: CFC?
Clue - they don't stand for Chelski Football Club.

They had a particularly marked effect on 'the natural course of the planet'...
Or was that all sunspot activity?
Indeed, as I've said before, the argument that this is all about the sun doesn't pan out. Sunspot activity is and has for several years been at a record low - temperature's shouldn't have flatlined or fallen a bit, we should all be fecking freezing. Sadly what is happening won't become apparent until sunspot activity returns to normal in 5 or 6 years.
 
#18
Global Warming/ climate Change may or may not happen to a meaningful degree.
What is certain is that mankinds impact on it is negligible, the UK's imact even more so.
This planet canstantly changes, how many ice ages have we had? How much have sea levels changed? to claim
that fossil fuels and car usage are casuing the damage is ludicrous, go compare the emissions from a single volcanic erruption to the emissions produced by all the cars we use and re-evaluate the data.
Climate change is a handy cash cow for governments around the globe, nothing more.
We were experiencing global warming and disaster was just around the corner, until the data cast doubt upon it and now we are facing climate change and disaser is just around the corner. Just like they told us in the 1970's we were facing a new ice age, seeing a pattern emerging yet?

Instead of examining the issues carefully we will continue to throw precious resources at fighting against a problem we do not really have. Its politically useful but bollox.
 
#19
jagman said:
Global Warming/ climate Change may or may not happen to a meaningful degree.
What is certain is that mankinds impact on it is negligible, the UK's imact even more so.
This planet canstantly changes, how many ice ages have we had? How much have sea levels changed? to claim
that fossil fuels and car usage are casuing the damage is ludicrous, go compare the emissions from a single volcanic erruption to the emissions produced by all the cars we use and re-evaluate the data.
Climate change is a handy cash cow for governments around the globe, nothing more.
We were experiencing global warming and disaster was just around the corner, until the data cast doubt upon it and now we are facing climate change and disaser is just around the corner. Just like they told us in the 1970's we were facing a new ice age, seeing a pattern emerging yet?

Instead of examining the issues carefully we will continue to throw precious resources at fighting against a problem we do not really have. Its politically useful but bollox.


BINGO


Mt Pinatubo, a fairly small eruption on the global scale, dropped the worlds temerature by 0.2 degrees all on it's ownsome, that's a bigger drop in a week than the Greens area 'measuring' over a period of decades and being supposedly caused by mankind.
 
#20
Schleswig-Holstein said:
jumpinjarhead said:
I thought the science was conclusive that evil man (especially in the even more evil developed "West") was the reason for climate change such that we MUST act now to save the planet? I mean anyone who dared question this "truth" has been marginalized and excoriated.

Al Gore where are you? Yet more Inconvenient Truth?


Linky
For someone who is happy to believe in an invisible sky fairy, you seem to really have something against science....

But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month. If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.

If proved correct, all he has to do is submit his manuscript to either Science or Nature. If proved correct, the manuscript would be fast tracked for publication, his company would have more publicity than he could shake a stick at and he'd be rich...

So, why hasn't he submitted it?

1. those evil climate-scientists would use the peer-review process to bury it?
2. his story doesn't actually stand up to scrutiny?

I'm guessing 2, as if he really had cracked the issue, he'd be the most famous man on the planet...

If I recollect, you say you are in an academic post - if so, you'll recall this saying: "Publish or be damned..."
Noting at all against "science" old man. I just like to see the scientific method being used honestly and without politics. If you are referring to the "science" that has brought us the world wide panic about global warming, oops, I mean climate change, I think you are the one who needs to take another look at it. If there was ever something that is being driven by ideologues instead of scientists, this is it.

As you no doubt already know from my other posts in other threads, my own research (not the mere allegations of the evil people who are questioning the legitimacy of this "movement," persuades me that this, like so many other initiatives being crammed down our collective throats, is in large part little more than a push toward socialism (or other "isms "that feature centralized governmental control at the expense of individual liberty) and the forcible redistribution of wealth.

Many luminaries of the socialist etc. world order moved into environmentalism with the collapse of the soviet union since this is a very handy and easily manipulated way (save those poor polar bears on the melting ice floe) to achieve their social and political ends. We see the very same phenomenon here in the US with all the financial, health and other "crises" that are so useful in completely overturning our Constitutional system.

Thus it is not the details of the arguments and counterarguments about climate change, whether pro or con, that bother me nearly so much as the way the issue itself is hijacked by those with a much larger agenda. How else can you explain the vitriol and hate that spews from the proponents of this "movement" against anyone (scientist or otherwise) who even suggests things might be different or at least no of such moment as to warrant the draconian and often ill-conceived policies to "fix' climate change?

Anyway, I have discussed this in other threads and am bored now.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads