Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Climate Change: Scientists Say "Last Chance"

FHA

LE
I admit I was more than a bit concerned by the recent announcement of building a lot more offshore wind farms. Even though there's a fair bit of wind in the UK it's simply not up to the task, maintenance is also a real bastard.

There is only one reliable, rational and effective "renewable" electricity generating source and that's hydro. However that needs a whole bunch of the rainy, hilly and suitably valley shaped bits of the UK to have dams built, the Jocks aren't keen which is a shame as it would give them a serious and viable industry like the Norwegians have done.


Yep, Boris soon changed his tune when his bird got her nose in the trough, getting paid by an environmental lobby group.

From the Oceana Inc. wiki page:

“Oceana is dedicated to combating the numerous threats to the world's oceans that climate change imposes. Its main focus has been the acidification of the ocean, which threatens marine life, especially shellfish and coral that are necessary to many marine ecosystems, and, consequently, sources of seafood. They also focus on promoting offshore wind farms and combating the use of offshore drilling and seismic airgun blasting.”


Sent from my iPhone
 
we'd even be able to export power which Germany and France need badly.
But Germany has enough generation capacity, without nuclear and coal. Shed loads of wind farms, especially in the North Sea. Too bad they're not connected to those areas where the power is needed. In fact the North Sea wind farms aren't generating at all, they're even consuming power in order not to sieze up. So when the last coal and nuclear powered stations close in the not too distant future all will be well. Or so gov't sources and the media keep telling us.
 
Why reports that contains, 'may, might, possibly, perhaps etc...' allows governments to raise taxes...
I don’t think anybody is taxing Neanderthals. Unless you count some members on here?
 
Exactly how California has screwed the pooch. Lots of Solar energy but storage issues. Same with Wind ( but maintaining them is $ and its killing birds by the thousands, upsetting the Greenies ironically). So we are left with a small amount of Hydroelectric.

Hence the 'brown outs' and the highest energy costs in the U.S. That's progress. Also the Govenor pledged no more Gasoline engines by 2035.... That wont put a strain on an already crippled system...
Don't forget closing down 75% of its Nuclear power generation capability.
 
Just how Fred Flintstone's car managed to cause global warming back in the day. A conundrum and a quandary, is it not?
No.
 
Last edited:
How many "last chances" is that now? Is anyone counting?
greta 2065.jpg
 
It may be interesting to see the global warming nutjobs and Swedish Doom Goblin explain this one:


Wind farms would have saved them, but no, they kept on rubbing sticks together and burning things - just like today....
 

Tyk

LE
Read the article.

Nowhere does it claim


So no conundrum or quandary. Just a little straw man.

I think you will find the reference to Fred Flintstone's car was what is occasionally called a joke or possibly a parody.

The reason I say parody is because the climate alarmists are saying absurd things about how the world will end in X years where X is a small number unless we do something insane like stop producing CO2 next Wednesday and Flintstone's car is as ludicrious.

The whole climate alarmist industry (I hate the use of the word, but climate activism has become a business not a cause) is based on debunked science and rhetoric and it tries very hard to gloss over the fact that the climate changes on its own and what humans do or don't do in CO2 emissions makes jack all difference.

The rather lightweight article you mention is about how extremely low technology populations failed to cope with the perfectly naturally occurring changes to the climate and went extinct as a result. That's not a scenario that will happen now.

I could go on at great length about how full of excrement the climate alarmists are, but it's a religion to the XR types and quite honestly they're so bloody boring I'm sick of the conversations where they ignore the evidence and stick to their obsessive doctrine.
 
I think you will find the reference to Fred Flintstone's car was what is occasionally called a joke or possibly a parody.

The reason I say parody is because the climate alarmists are saying absurd things about how the world will end in X years where X is a small number unless we do something insane like stop producing CO2 next Wednesday and Flintstone's car is as ludicrious.

The whole climate alarmist industry (I hate the use of the word, but climate activism has become a business not a cause) is based on debunked science and rhetoric and it tries very hard to gloss over the fact that the climate changes on its own and what humans do or don't do in CO2 emissions makes jack all difference.

The rather lightweight article you mention is about how extremely low technology populations failed to cope with the perfectly naturally occurring changes to the climate and went extinct as a result. That's not a scenario that will happen now.

I could go on at great length about how full of excrement the climate alarmists are, but it's a religion to the XR types and quite honestly they're so bloody boring I'm sick of the conversations where they ignore the evidence and stick to their obsessive doctrine.
If you read the thread, you’ll see I didn’t post the article first.
 
I think you will find the reference to Fred Flintstone's car was what is occasionally called a joke or possibly a parody.

The reason I say parody is because the climate alarmists are saying absurd things about how the world will end in X years where X is a small number unless we do something insane like stop producing CO2 next Wednesday and Flintstone's car is as ludicrious.

The whole climate alarmist industry (I hate the use of the word, but climate activism has become a business not a cause) is based on debunked science and rhetoric and it tries very hard to gloss over the fact that the climate changes on its own and what humans do or don't do in CO2 emissions makes jack all difference.

The rather lightweight article you mention is about how extremely low technology populations failed to cope with the perfectly naturally occurring changes to the climate and went extinct as a result. That's not a scenario that will happen now.

I could go on at great length about how full of excrement the climate alarmists are, but it's a religion to the XR types and quite honestly they're so bloody boring I'm sick of the conversations where they ignore the evidence and stick to their obsessive doctrine.

The main thrust of my ridicule was at the notion of climate change being solely man made where the study showed an extinction-level event clearly could not have been caused by the few hominids wandering the planet at the time.

Todays climate change looney-toons would have us believe (and depend on it for their existence) it's All Our Fault How Dare You.
 
The main thrust of my ridicule was at the notion of climate change being solely man made where the study showed an extinction-level event clearly could not have been caused by the few hominids wandering the planet at the time.

Todays climate change looney-toons would have us believe (and depend on it for their existence) something entirely different.
Only people with a very poor understanding of paleo climates would believe that climate change is solely man made.

I love pointing out to zealots how the warming experienced during the Younger Dryas was greater than that observed now and predicted to be in the next century.
 

Tyk

LE
The main thrust of my ridicule was at the notion of climate change being solely man made where the study showed an extinction-level event clearly could not have been caused by the few hominids wandering the planet at the time.

Todays climate change looney-toons would have us believe (and depend on it for their existence) it's All Our Fault How Dare You.

Indeed, it's an inconvenient fact, along with the whole raft of similar inconvenient facts that the XR types prefer to ignore as it doesn't suit their obsessive narrative.
 
Only people with a very poor understanding of paleo climates would believe that climate change is solely man made.

I love pointing out to zealots how the warming experienced during the Younger Dryas was greater than that observed now and predicted to be in the next century.

How Dare You.

How Dare You imply that I have a very poor understanding of paleo climates.

I am here to tell you unequivocally that I have absolutely no understanding of paleo climates whatsoever.

I demand a retraction.
 

Latest Threads

Top