Visit the historic Lancashire Textile Project with over 500 photos and 190 taped interviews|2|0
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    16  17  18  [19]  20  21   Next Page  Last Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted -  15/12/2007  :  07:03
I thought it might be a good thing to have a topic devoted to this important subject.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk
Replies
Author
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    16  17  18  [19]  20  21   Next Page  Last Page
 
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 03/11/2009 : 05:25
The human life-scale is so short compared to geological time that it is futile to search for comforting examples beyond 100,000 years ago. Our modern society is so complicated that it would only take one massive sunspot or Little Ice Age to give us a serious problem. Like meteor strikes, the one thing that is certain is that these things will happen, the only question is when.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 13/11/2009 : 15:15
On Thursday's `Today' programme, Euan Davies interviewed a `climate change sceptic', Ian Plimer, who is Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide. As you know, I take the same view as most scientists, that almost all the scientific evidence supports the contention that climate change is happening, is man-made and will soon cause untold trouble unless we do something to mitigate the effects. But I would change my view overnight if there were suddenly to be a lot of evidence against this, and so I listened to Plimer with interest. Unfortunately, Euan Davies might be knowledgeable about business but he's not the best person to interview a scientist, and Plimer simply claimed that most scientists were supporting climate change in order to make more money via research funding or simply to frighten people.

To find out more I researched him on the Internet. He seems to be fanatically opposed to the man-made climate change hypothesis and uses glib statements about how "it has all happened before". The arguments he uses have been around for a while, well debated and no longer accepted by other scientists. But he continues to use these arguments and I wondered why he wants to fight against the hypothesis even though he doesn't have any sound scientific reasons. I note that he has written a book titled `Heaven and Earth — Global Warming: The Missing Science' which has just been published and needs promoting. Also, he is a director of three Australian mining companies which explore and mine precious metals and coal (and the coal mining extends to other countries such as China). He has stated that the government's climate change strategy will destroy the Australian mining industry. All in all, I would say that he has a vested interest in fighting the hypothesis. His claim about scientists only `doing it for the money' seems a bit hollow when you look at the financial interest he has in opposing the hypothesis.

Curiously, although he will not accept the scientific evidence for man-made climate change he does accept scientific evidence in his other major arena - fighting Creationists. But he seems to tackle this the wrong way too and the police have had to throw him out of meetings held by a Creationist minister in Australia because of his antics. He started a court case against the minister, accusing him of things like deception and fraud but lost the case and has to pay out 500,000 Aus dollars.

Other sceptics have made the same claim as Plimer, that most scientists were supporting climate change in order to make more money via research funding. The counter to this argument is that any scientists who can find *sound* evidence against the hypothesis would make a bigger name for themselves than they would by supporting it, and would get showered with funds by governments who are faced with enormous costs in preparing for climate change (not to mention the energy companies, car companies etc). Just look at the coverage that the media give to sceptics like Plimer - now imagine the coverage if a group of respected scientists working on climate change came out with the story that it was not man-made, perhaps even that it was not happening.

Edited by - Tizer on 13/11/2009 15:16:15


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 13/11/2009 : 16:08
Well researched Peter. I suppose that in the end we all have to make our own minds up and whether climate change is man-made or natural we still have to find ways of living with it. Unfortunately it looks as though we have left it too late. There is something so fundamentally right about the Gaia theory which attracts me. That's how simple my view is, it looks as though the world has an in-built mechanism to protect itself by removing the cause of the major detriments that are attacking it. Plenty of time to clean up and start again.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
tripps
Senior Member


1404 Posts
Posted - 13/11/2009 : 17:29
The Prof is not alone. I heard on an early news bulletin thios week (R5)  that a large number of prominent Australians had said the AGW was a myth. They were led by Malcolm Turnbull (ex PM?). This is another of those news items which did not survive beyond one bulletin.  There are vested interest on both sides here, and I'm not knowledgeable enough to decipher it all - so put me with the don't knows.


Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 14/11/2009 : 11:42
AGW? Oh yes, Anthropogenic Global warming. Tripps, yes, Prof Plimer has been hailed as a hero by the press in Australia, at least by the more conservative end of the press. They love him because he is giving them what they want as opposed to the majority of scientists who are telling them an inconvenient truth (as Al Gore would put it).

Have a look at the front page of your copy of The Times today and you'll see their Populus poll shows more than half of UK folk are sceptics. People, not surprisingly, don't want to believe in it. They ignore the warnings of hundreds of expert IPCC scientists yet blithely accept the unfounded claims of a few non-experts. Nowt so queer as folk!


Go to Top of Page
frankwilk
Senior Member


3975 Posts
Posted - 14/11/2009 : 12:02
Have a look at the front page of your copy of The Times today and you'll see their Populus poll shows more than half of UK folk are sceptics.

Ask yourself why are people sceptical because Goverments are using CC to raise revenue. That is not going to change attitudes now doing something about it will change attitudes,like putting up everyones fuel. Stanley had it earlier,  make the 1st 100/1000 units cheap then increase the price as you use more. No that won't work because the poor and larger families will be hit hardest. Why not issue everyone with a card with say the average useage of electricity when it's gone it's gone until next year !!!!  Now that would focus minds. Like the same for water use  meter and pay. I know I wouldn't swill out the empty can before it goes in the recycle bin if I had to pay for the water through a meter. And why not do the same for fuel Petrol and diesel etc. Whilst we are at it put Road Tax on Petrol or Diesel at the pump get the Shopkeeper to collect the revenue and get rid of the Road Fund Tax Offices. Why don't we do that because goverment would lose a lever to control, so it's up to the Goverment to explain why we are in this mess on CC policy

Edited by - frankwilk on 14/11/2009 12:06:58 PM



Frank Wilkinson       Once Navy Always Navy Go to Top of Page
thomo
Barlick Born Old Salt


2021 Posts
Posted - 14/11/2009 : 15:16
Maybe if they turned some of the lights out in big office blocks at nights and weekends it would help, ie London can be seen from the moon at night, possibly even from deep space.


thomo Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 14/11/2009 : 16:42
The I. Mech. E. has concluded that the Government's plans to make carbon emission cuts of 80% by 2050 are physically impossible to achieve...."even if the UK managed to cut the demand for energy by 50%, it would still require an extra 16 nuclear power stations and 27,000 wind turbines by 2030 to be sure of hitting the target." According to the BBC News site, "IMeche also called for a major investment in geo-engineering.

It is calling for a "war" on climate change with a beefed up government department in charge.

It could also mean the introduction of some form of carbon "rationing" for individuals to make people aware of how much energy they are consuming."

The BBC news story is here.

Britain led the way with the technology needed for the Industrial Revolution, why don't we now do it again with the technology for this next revolution? The end of the I MechE report says: "Understandably for most governments, the idea of actioning projects which will benefit people in future centuries is politically difficult. However, for a nation such as the UK, research and development into adaption technologies may not only help us cope with future climate impacts and rising sea levels, but also enable us to help more vulnerable nations and provide a highly valuable future component to our economy."

The I Mech E report in PDF download is here.


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 14/11/2009 : 16:58
As many people know, I'm ploughing my way through 'The History of Christianity' at the moment. Fascinating and enlightening. One of the things that strikes me is the similarity between the debates in the church over the centuries and the contemporary debate over climate change. The people with the knowledge, the people with an agenda and the politicians argue their case and the mass of people sit there hopelessly bemused and grab hold of the 'truth' that suits them best. (Apart from the ones who have no interest or knowledge) The bad news is that after over 2000 years the problem hasn't been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. I think this is a good allegory for what is going on now in the climate change debate. The big difference is that we haven't got 2000 years. Sorry lads, it's time for the activists to take charge, this is the governments. Is that a comforting thought for the future?


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 09:53
BBC news site: `Sea levels are likely to rise by about 1.4m (4ft 6in) globally by 2100 as polar ice melts, according to a major review of climate change in Antarctica'. Based on a new report from the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) titled `Antarctic Climate Change and the Environment' and written by 100 leading scientists in various disciplines and reviewed by a further 200.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/sci/tech/8387137.stm


Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 03/12/2009 : 20:26
I hear there is going to be an independent investigation into the content of the CRU emails by soomeone from Glasgow University but it will take until next spring (but I hear nothing about any investigation into the criminal act of hacking into the University of East Anglia's servers or about tracking down who did it and who put them up to it). Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is using the emails as an excuse to do nothing at the Copenhagen talks. I suspect someone has stolen the emails and released them as a `spoiler' to prevent the talks succeeding.


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 04/12/2009 : 06:12
I heard the same report Peter and thought "How convenient". However, I believe that the case for action is so strong now that a diversion like this will not have much effect. I suspect that the result of the conference has already been decided by back channels and the beaurocrats that actually do the work. We shall see.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
tripps
Senior Member


1404 Posts
Posted - 04/12/2009 : 08:38
There is a reasonable possibility that the "hacker" was in fact a whistle blower who is using the hacking story to protect him/her self? We just don't know.
A Canadian professor said just that on newsnight recently.


Go to Top of Page
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart


36804 Posts
Posted - 05/12/2009 : 05:24
I saw a news item last night about a remote salt pan in the Shara that has been used for centuries with camels as transport. The salt traders are having to use motor transport because the drought in that area means the camels can't get enough water. It's small signs like this which convince me we have a problem.


Stanley Challenger Graham




Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk Go to Top of Page
Tizer
VIP Member


5150 Posts
Posted - 05/12/2009 : 12:32
The CRU scientists and data are only a part of the whole story and there are many other climate scientists around the world whose data supports the same concept of human driven global warming. CRU is only one cog in the wheel. I have a colleague who is regarded as the foremost analytical scientist in his own field of research. In addition to doing government funded research and analysis, his laboratory does work on contract for companies around the world. To satisfy these companies, he has to show that his lab has the highest levels of quality control and laboratory accreditation to ensure that doubt cannot be expressed regarding data. The government funded work benefits from this control and accreditation being in place, but it is in place more because the private sector demands it than the government. Perhaps the government would do better to demand the same levels of quality control and laboratory accreditation of the organisations that it funds?


Go to Top of Page
Topic is 30 Pages Long:
Go to Page
  First Page  Previous Page    16  17  18  [19]  20  21   Next Page  Last Page
 


Set us as your default homepage Bookmark us Privacy   Copyright 2004-2011 www.oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk All Rights Reserved. Design by: Frost SkyPortal.net Go To Top Of Page

Page load time - 0.719